228132 Bullies, 4811 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 21 to 30 of 43
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 123 45 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. DARPAChief is online now

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    406

    Posted On:
    8/09/2012 12:47am


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Rene "Zendokan" Gysenbergs View Post
    1) This is for the No-Gi Judo part of your OP post:

    Judo is a style of grappling that is tied to a certain ruleset, just as
    (Sport) SAMBO is a style of grappling that is tied to another certain ruleset, just as
    BJJ is a style of grappling that is tied to another certain ruleset, just as
    Greco-Roman is a style of grappling that is tied to another certain ruleset, just as
    SubGrappling is a style of grappling that is tied to another certain ruleset and so on.

    The rulesets steer the evolution of a grappling style into a certain way:
    With Judo, for example,
    - you have to maintain a more upright position compared to Wrestling and SAMBO,
    - throws are awarded more points compared to BJJ
    - A jacket changes the grip fight strategies
    - and so on...
    And while the rulesets have created so many different forms of grappling, those rulesets are needed.
    The reason is that if we used one unified ruleset, only the techniques that would have a more than averige succes rate in that competition would survive and the grappling community will lose techniques in the long run.

    So don't try to unify grappling by adding a No-Gi component to Judo which would borrow from Greco-Roman and SubGrappling, but know that with Judo, SAMBO, BJJ, Greco-Roman, Freestyle and SubGrappling about all the bases are covered. You can crosstrain.

    In the end it's all grappling and the skills that you learn in one art can be transported to another art, sometimes with less effort (Greco-Roman to Freestyle), other times it will take more effort and extra training (Judo to SubGrappling).

    2) This is for the adding of striking to Judo:

    Again, which ruleset of Striking will you add? American Kickboxing, Muay Thai or SanDa?
    Which ruleset will you create for your "Combat Judo"? Will there be Gi and No-Gi Combat Judo tournements? And again: so on...

    Or you can crosstrain in a striking art that you prefer. Judo is cheap and taught by instructors who depend on another job to provide for themselfs, so that means that most schools will have only 2 to 3 classes a week. This gives you enough opertunity to crosstrain in a striking art or another grappling art.
    My appreciation of Judo is pretty limited, so brace yourself:

    I thought rules existed a) to determine a winner, and b) to keep everyone safe. In combat sport that focuses on grappling exclusively, it would seem reasonable that someone should win if they successfully submit someone with a joint lock, choke, or throw, as long as it's low-risk enough a maneuver that competitors are more or less healthy.

    The entire premise of actually enforcing a style of grappling with a ruleset seems nothing less than anti-intellectual. If the most reasonably open ruleset makes a strategy or technique go the way of the dodo, isn't that a good thing? I live for the day that Judoka stop turtling. It's stupid. It makes no sense unless you're playing a game of throw-and-hide-and-go-seek in white pajamas. Is that supposed to be Budo?

    If minutia like how people stand or grab changes because people are forced to be competitive for reasons involving skilled grappling and not stylish or entertaining grappling, personally I'd be glad that something ineffectual would go by the wayside and everyone could benefit from learning the new method. How is longing for stylistic integrity anything less than vanity?

    On a different note, what about the striking in kata? I was under the impression that one of the functions of Kodokan Judo kata was to preserve excellent techniques just simply ill-suited for competition. Striking has been in Judo from the very beginning, and Kano's foundational training was in a school distinctive and famed for it's striking, so again I'm at a loss.

    It's funny, you know I used to have this idea that Gendai Budo was progressive and full of potential for growth and things. Only recently has it occurred to me there's a conservative side as well.
  2. Disastorm is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    62

    Posted On:
    8/09/2012 1:17am


     Style: Judo, BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by DARPAChief View Post
    My appreciation of Judo is pretty limited, so brace yourself:

    I thought rules existed a) to determine a winner, and b) to keep everyone safe. In combat sport that focuses on grappling exclusively, it would seem reasonable that someone should win if they successfully submit someone with a joint lock, choke, or throw, as long as it's low-risk enough a maneuver that competitors are more or less healthy.

    The entire premise of actually enforcing a style of grappling with a ruleset seems nothing less than anti-intellectual. If the most reasonably open ruleset makes a strategy or technique go the way of the dodo, isn't that a good thing? I live for the day that Judoka stop turtling. It's stupid. It makes no sense unless you're playing a game of throw-and-hide-and-go-seek in white pajamas. Is that supposed to be Budo?

    If minutia like how people stand or grab changes because people are forced to be competitive for reasons involving skilled grappling and not stylish or entertaining grappling, personally I'd be glad that something ineffectual would go by the wayside and everyone could benefit from learning the new method. How is longing for stylistic integrity anything less than vanity?

    On a different note, what about the striking in kata? I was under the impression that one of the functions of Kodokan Judo kata was to preserve excellent techniques just simply ill-suited for competition. Striking has been in Judo from the very beginning, and Kano's foundational training was in a school distinctive and famed for it's striking, so again I'm at a loss.

    It's funny, you know I used to have this idea that Gendai Budo was progressive and full of potential for growth and things. Only recently has it occurred to me there's a conservative side as well.
    Well if everyone used the same ruleset the question would be as to which ruleset? With some rulesets you may end up losing some useful techniques such as learning how to pin someone, and while the turtle is sometimes ridiculous, you would still lose the attacks against the turtle since no one would be doing the turtle.
    There would also be the question of points, or would you just want submission to end the match, which would mean some matches could potentially last forever.
    There would also be the question of using a gi or no gi. Its important to have a variety of techniques so people have a choice of what to use in various situations and everyone just doesn't do the same thing all the time.
    As some people mentioned you also lose specialization, by trying to be good at many things, they wont be as good in any one thing. In other words wrestlers wouldn't be as good at take downs, and judoka wouldn't be as good at throws if you changed the rulesets to not focus on throws and takedowns.
    And why would you decide to stop the rules at "grappling only"? Why not add striking? then you just have everyone doing mma.
    Last edited by Disastorm; 8/09/2012 1:27am at .
  3. DARPAChief is online now

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    406

    Posted On:
    8/09/2012 1:32am


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Disastorm View Post
    Well if everyone used the same ruleset the question would be as to which ruleset? With some rulesets you may end up losing some useful techniques such as learning how to pin someone, and while the turtle is sometimes ridiculous, you would still lose the attacks against the turtle since no one would be doing the turtle.
    There would also be the question of points, or would you just want submission to end the match, which would mean some matches could potentially last forever.
    There would also be the question of using a gi or no gi. Its important to have a variety of techniques so people have a choice of what to use in various situations and everyone just doesn't do the same thing all the time.
    I can buy that there might be different competitions for jacketed or non-jacketed, and that there might be value in both points and non-points-based competition (not sure about preserving attacks against the turtle); setting different conditions wherein a match could take place is surely reasonable if those conditions reflect an inherent practicality. But making those conditions so restrictive as to mandate a grip style and forbid certain sequences of attack to maintain some kind of aesthetic appeal...where do you stop? Why not just have a sport that is just two people vying for uchimata, because this is the purest Judo thing or some such nonsense?

    I know it's ultimately a game, but I thought what made it different from baseball was that it wasn't an abstract one.
  4. Rene "Zendokan" Gysenbergs is online now
    Rene "Zendokan" Gysenbergs's Avatar

    fist first Philosopher

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sanctuary of Pallas Athena (Belgium)
    Posts
    2,658

    Posted On:
    8/09/2012 5:19am

    Join us... or die
     Style: Savate (LBF/SD/LC) - BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by DARPAChief View Post
    My appreciation of Judo is pretty limited, so brace yourself:

    I thought rules existed a) to determine a winner, and b) to keep everyone safe. In combat sport that focuses on grappling exclusively, it would seem reasonable that someone should win if they successfully submit someone with a joint lock, choke, or throw, as long as it's low-risk enough a maneuver that competitors are more or less healthy.

    The entire premise of actually enforcing a style of grappling with a ruleset seems nothing less than anti-intellectual. If the most reasonably open ruleset makes a strategy or technique go the way of the dodo, isn't that a good thing? I live for the day that Judoka stop turtling. It's stupid. It makes no sense unless you're playing a game of throw-and-hide-and-go-seek in white pajamas. Is that supposed to be Budo?

    If minutia like how people stand or grab changes because people are forced to be competitive for reasons involving skilled grappling and not stylish or entertaining grappling, personally I'd be glad that something ineffectual would go by the wayside and everyone could benefit from learning the new method. How is longing for stylistic integrity anything less than vanity?

    On a different note, what about the striking in kata? I was under the impression that one of the functions of Kodokan Judo kata was to preserve excellent techniques just simply ill-suited for competition. Striking has been in Judo from the very beginning, and Kano's foundational training was in a school distinctive and famed for it's striking, so again I'm at a loss.

    It's funny, you know I used to have this idea that Gendai Budo was progressive and full of potential for growth and things. Only recently has it occurred to me there's a conservative side as well.
    Well, your "a" and "b" are right, but a+b=c in this case with "c" being "the best usage of techniques and strategy under that specific ruleset".

    A grappling example:

    (Sport) SAMBO and Judo have so many techniques in common that if they would breed together, the offspring would ride the little yellow bus to school while wearing a Football helmet without being on the Football team.

    Yet they are different in strategy and look/feel if you watch them. The reason is that the ruleset evolved both into their own thing.
    In (Sport) SAMBO, chokes are illegal and fighters can bend more towards their opponents (like Wrestlers), so the jacket grip fighting changed and they got a second specialisation into leglocks.
    In Judo, chokes are legal, the pin is a great game control techniques, the upperbody has to remain in upright(er) position and leglocks are illegal, so prepare for a lot more hip and shoulder throws with lapel chokes as a finish.

    Let's bring in their nephew BJJ, also a jacketed grappling sport where chokes and leglocks (from blue belt and higher) are legal.
    So you would expect that the ratio chokes/armbars would be in an equal proportion to leglocks, yet it isn't.
    While the ruleset doesn't favour one of the two groups, there is still a believe in the BJJ community that going for a leglock after you were in the position where you could perform a choke and/or an armbar is considered as a lose of position. So leglocks are still not that big in the BJJ community compared to armbar/chokes.

    From my own limited experience of training with a SAMBOist, if he went from the mount to a more leglock favorable position, I was still dominated.

    Another example of my own experience: I started Judo when I already had some experience in BJJ. Being to break a pin was for me the most difficult to learn. Since the pin isn't a game winning tactic in BJJ competitions, it really doesn't get trained at all, yet the pin is well important in Judo, so getting one and breaking one is trained (a lot).

    Everytime I got stuck underneath one, I was lost because even if I was better on the ground than him, I couldn't engage him into groundfighting because he just pinned me, but he didn't try to choke me or armbar me. Because if he did that he would brake the pin himself.
    My only option was to learn the "Judo way" of breaking said pin, before I could engage him in groundfighting.
    Now I know that you are thinking: A pin isn't a submission so while you can't break free in the 25 seconds (Judo competition time to break free) after 5 or 6 minutes you could forge break the pin.
    Well, I did that in 4 minutes, but that meant that I would lose in a competition or that in a real fight I would be helpless for minimum 240 seconds. Both cases aren't good.



    In the end an unified grappling ruleset would mean that we would lose valuable techniques, because the different rulesets creates a playing field where the frequency use (not their valuebility) of those techniques is augmented.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jiujitsu77
    You know you are crazy about BJJ/Martial arts when...
    Quote Originally Posted by Humanzee
    ...your books on Kama Sutra and BJJ are interchangeable.
    Quote Originally Posted by jk55299 on Keysi Fighting Method
    It looks like this is a great fighting method if someone replaces your shampoo with superglue.
    The real deadly:
  5. italian judoka is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    23

    Posted On:
    8/09/2012 5:55am


     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Rene "Zendokan" Gysenbergs View Post
    Well, your "a" and "b" are right, but a+b=c in this case with "c" being "the best usage of techniques and strategy under that specific ruleset".


    In the end an unified grappling ruleset would mean that we would lose valuable techniques, because the different rulesets creates a playing field where the frequency use (not their valuebility) of those techniques is augmented.
    I agree with you. Judo is a sport martial art conceived to avoid injuries, so there are no strikes and its rules evolved in the time eliminating dangerous techniques.
    If some judoka want to learn how to strike, the best way to do it, instead of bastardizing Judo with strikes, is to start paralley a second martial art like karate, MT, TKD or boxe.

    There are many judoka who studied a complementary martial art and knows how to strike, but nobody thinks to do it in a Judo tournament.
  6. DARPAChief is online now

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    406

    Posted On:
    8/09/2012 11:31pm


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Thanks for the detailed explanation, Zendokan. Your pin example is very interesting, although invoking “in a real fight” begs the sort of question the OP was asking. Despite that pinning and escaping a pin are useful skills, it would seem to diverge from the goal of a two-person grappling competition to entertain real-world hypotheticals. If the latter was one's goal, wouldn't one be better served by proper self-defense or combative training anyway?

    On the other hand, your conclusion
    Quote Originally Posted by Rene "Zendokan" Gysenbergs View Post
    In the end an unified grappling ruleset would mean that we would lose valuable techniques, because the different rulesets creates a playing field where the frequency use (not their valuebility) of those techniques is augmented.
    appears at odds with a couple of the examples provided:
    Let's bring in their nephew BJJ, also a jacketed grappling sport where chokes and leglocks (from blue belt and higher) are legal.
    So you would expect that the ratio chokes/armbars would be in an equal proportion to leglocks, yet it isn't.
    While the ruleset doesn't favour one of the two groups, there is still a believe in the BJJ community that going for a leglock after you were in the position where you could perform a choke and/or an armbar is considered as a lose of position. So leglocks are still not that big in the BJJ community compared to armbar/chokes.

    From my own limited experience of training with a SAMBOist, if he went from the mount to a more leglock favorable position, I was still dominated.
    These examples indicate that one's approach can still differ considerably despite an equal ruleset. If anything, it suggests that rather the organization influences execution, and that the rules are only incidental to stylistic approach. Were Judo to embrace a ruleset closer to the permissiveness of BJJ or SAMBO, perhaps a few rule-dependant strategies would bite the dust, but who's to say the Judo community wouldn't retain its own distinctiveness as the former two have? Is something precious lost in Freestyle SAMBO that lives in Sport SAMBO?
  7. Rene "Zendokan" Gysenbergs is online now
    Rene "Zendokan" Gysenbergs's Avatar

    fist first Philosopher

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sanctuary of Pallas Athena (Belgium)
    Posts
    2,658

    Posted On:
    8/10/2012 10:25am

    Join us... or die
     Style: Savate (LBF/SD/LC) - BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by DARPAChief View Post
    Thanks for the detailed explanation, Zendokan. Your pin example is very interesting, although invoking “in a real fight” begs the sort of question the OP was asking. Despite that pinning and escaping a pin are useful skills, it would seem to diverge from the goal of a two-person grappling competition to entertain real-world hypotheticals. If the latter was one's goal, wouldn't one be better served by proper self-defense or combative training anyway?

    On the other hand, your conclusion appears at odds with a couple of the examples provided: These examples indicate that one's approach can still differ considerably despite an equal ruleset. If anything, it suggests that rather the organization influences execution, and that the rules are only incidental to stylistic approach. Were Judo to embrace a ruleset closer to the permissiveness of BJJ or SAMBO, perhaps a few rule-dependant strategies would bite the dust, but who's to say the Judo community wouldn't retain its own distinctiveness as the former two have? Is something precious lost in Freestyle SAMBO that lives in Sport SAMBO?
    1) I'm personally not for self-defense training in general and combative training for civilians for several reasons:
    - the competition aspect (that is missing in self-defense and most Combatives training) is the closests that you can get to a fight, it learns you to deal with adranaline dumps and unpredictability (even if it's limited by a ruleset).
    - A big part of Combat Sports is to applying your techniques against a resisting opponent, again someting that is missing in Self-Defense and Civilian Combatives training.
    - Most SD abd CCT's classes and instructors pray and augment your paranoia feelings and not your common sense
    - Unless you are an asshole, suffer from White Knight Syndrom or life in a bad neighbourhood, I suspect that your unarmed altercation are limited to a minimum of 1 to 5 when you're in your tweens and early thirties. I say altercations, because yelling insults at eachother while throwing some haymakers aren't fights.

    Combat Sports are more about getting in shape, socializing with people who have the same interest and learning to fight, even if the sport is limited by a ruleset (crosstraining is always an option). The "fighting" that you learn is mostly more than enough to survive altercations and in the worst case, a fight.
    It's still a "Combat" Sport, so learning to fight is an important part of it.

    2) Who says that a pin isn't a real world hypothetical? If someone just lays on top of me in a "streetfight/barfight" fight, I would be completely at the mercy and hoping that my friends can keep his friends away from me, until they "rescue" me.
    While I'm not the person that gets into a lot of bar fights and when I go out, I'm most of the time with a group of friends.
    Yet Judo has shown me that breaking a pin isn't my best skill, but I can train them safely in a controlled environment.

    3) I meant that Judo and Sport SAMBO have a more limited ruleset than BJJ.
    This meant that their ruleset stimulated more creativity for techniques that could be applied in said ruleset.
    One's approach can still differ considerably despite an equal ruleset, but how more limited a ruleset is, the lesser "tools/techniques" are there to use.
    In a more unrestricted ruleset, such as BJJ has, fighters will use the techniques that have the most succes in combination with a shorter time to learn these techniques.

    Here my example would be that in present day BJJ the focus lies on single leg and double leg takedowns (easier to learn than Judo throws and garanteed succes against other BJJs), but the game changes when a BJJer has a background in Judo (2nd or 3rd Dan grade).
    At those moments I see a lot of BJJers earn frequent flyer miles in the competitions, yet while under the ruleset of BJJ every Judo throw is legal, they aren't trained in BJJ.

    People take the path of the lesser resistance, if the pay is (almost) equal...untill something changes the dynamics of the game.

    4) Freestyle SAMBO came about 80 years after Sport SAMBO and is a less restricted ruleset to get BJJers and Judoka in SAMBO competitions. You will see that people with a SAMBO background will still go more for armbars and leglocks, while people with a BJJ and Judo background will prefer armbars and chokes.
    The influence will be minimal, it would be better to train in BJJ or Judo and crosstrain in SAMBO in combination with doing competitions in the limited rulesets. Fighters with such a background will "kill" under the Freestyle ruleset, because they had to train the full gamma of techniques to have a chance under the limited rulesets.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jiujitsu77
    You know you are crazy about BJJ/Martial arts when...
    Quote Originally Posted by Humanzee
    ...your books on Kama Sutra and BJJ are interchangeable.
    Quote Originally Posted by jk55299 on Keysi Fighting Method
    It looks like this is a great fighting method if someone replaces your shampoo with superglue.
    The real deadly:
  8. DARPAChief is online now

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    406

    Posted On:
    8/11/2012 2:09am


     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I think I might have been misread RE pins. My point was that however poignant a consideration like being occupied on the ground may be in a real-world scenario, potential real-world success is clearly not the guiding force in determining a winner; superior skill at the activity is. In retrospect, I think you are right that a pin, as a grappling skill, has merit. It just seemed hypocritical to pull out “realism” in a thread where the OP is being told that Judo is about grappling, not reality per se. If the latter is to be emphasized, Judo is not enough (although I believe the fellow who writes http://prevailtraining.wordpress.com/ would agree that it's an excellent building block).

    In any event, you make a compelling case for the multiple rulesets. I'm not sure I can or should swallow that across the board (i.e. the IJF dumping Judo techniques), but all the same I'd never thought of it that way.
  9. italian judoka is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    23

    Posted On:
    8/11/2012 3:06am


     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by DARPAChief View Post
    I think I might have been misread RE pins. My point was that however poignant a consideration like being occupied on the ground may be in a real-world scenario, potential real-world success is clearly not the guiding force in determining a winner; superior skill at the activity is. In retrospect, I think you are right that a pin, as a grappling skill, has merit. It just seemed hypocritical to pull out “realism” in a thread where the OP is being told that Judo is about grappling, not reality per se. If the latter is to be emphasized, Judo is not enough (although I believe the fellow who writes http://prevailtraining.wordpress.com/ would agree that it's an excellent building block).

    In any event, you make a compelling case for the multiple rulesets. I'm not sure I can or should swallow that across the board (i.e. the IJF dumping Judo techniques), but all the same I'd never thought of it that way.
    The general rule says "Never go down in a real fight". But there are some occasions where pins work well. One of my dojo mate is a cop, very strong in ground fight, who succesfully used pins many times to block unarmed microcriminals like bag-snatchers, under the protectin of his armed car mate, who discouraged third party interferences.
    Last edited by italian judoka; 8/11/2012 3:08am at . Reason: grammmatical errors
  10. BKR is offline
    BKR's Avatar

    My dog is cuter and smarter than yours.

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry, Idaho
    Posts
    4,735

    Posted On:
    8/11/2012 3:33am

    Join us... or die
     Style: Kodokan Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by DARPAChief View Post
    I think I might have been misread RE pins. My point was that however poignant a consideration like being occupied on the ground may be in a real-world scenario, potential real-world success is clearly not the guiding force in determining a winner; superior skill at the activity is. In retrospect, I think you are right that a pin, as a grappling skill, has merit. It just seemed hypocritical to pull out “realism” in a thread where the OP is being told that Judo is about grappling, not reality per se. If the latter is to be emphasized, Judo is not enough (although I believe the fellow who writes http://prevailtraining.wordpress.com/ would agree that it's an excellent building block).

    In any event, you make a compelling case for the multiple rulesets. I'm not sure I can or should swallow that across the board (i.e. the IJF dumping Judo techniques), but all the same I'd never thought of it that way.
    Which techniques have been "dumped" by the IJF?
    Falling for Judo since 1980
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 123 45 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.