Prove me wrong: Attention BJJ nutrider II

***Omega Supreme*** · Posted On: 6/30/2006 4:21pm

Originally started in the BJJ nutrider thread but for some reason the thread is all fucked up....

Originally Posted by Shuma-Gorath

Think of this in terms of per-capita bullshit. If there are five sambo schools in North America and one of them is bad that is still inferior to several hundred BJJ schools with two of them being bad.

I was afraid you were going to bring this up, unfortunately for me, there is no arguement for that. You have a better chance of not being bullshited at most BJJ schools.

The one legitimate case of this would be if the person specifically asked for a school that taught a striking art. In this case, BJJ programs would be an accessory. I found my BJJ school in a thread where I was trying to decide between Karate, Muay Thai and Boxing.

This must be where the brain damage started.

Out of curiosity, what exactly does BJJ not "offer" that a new martial arts student should prioritize above what it does offer?

Besides the obvious? Throws, Striking, self-defense, weapons, leg locks, non gi work. Before you answer remember they do some of that now but they went and crossed trained with other styles to do so. Everybody agrees with cross training. And has it's been said by me so many times this past 30 days ,I can't even count them, you need decent striking, throwing, submission if you want to become a fighter. Not, Wrestling, muay thai and BJJ. Because you can replace those with half a dozen other substitutes. As it was said before, I don't get this attitude or bullshit arguement from purple belts and higher because they've trained hard enough to know the differance.

Because you're losing?

losing what? The fact that your arguement has soooo many holes in it. Do you really believe the fact that if you state the same point over and over again that one day it'll be true? Congratulations, you're now bullshido.

**Neildo** · Posted On: 6/30/2006 4:25pm

Originally Posted by Omega

Originally started in the BJJ nutrider thread but for some reason the thread is all fucked up....

My bad, I think. Sorry dude.

**Odacon** · Posted On: 6/30/2006 4:54pm

Omega you're argument is sound but I think the main opposing point being hammered home is that while the striking, throwing and grappling can be replaced with arts not Muay Thai, Wrestling and BJJ the quality of tuition is on average higher in those arts and as such easier to find. Basically Bullshido has proven good fighters who don't use the above arts are around but that they are the exception rather than the rule.

***Omega Supreme*** · Posted On: 6/30/2006 5:05pm

Yeah, but then that actually strays from the point of the thread.

**Phrost** · Posted On: 6/30/2006 5:10pm

I think the main thing to keep in mind is that if it weren't for BJJ and the Gracie family specifically, the Martial Arts would be in a much worse state than they are today.

So if people were training grappling properly before Royce forcibly crammed the idea down everyone's throat, more power to them. But they were definitely in the minority, and not representative of the state of Martial Arts in the English speaking world at the time of UFC1.

**UpaLumpa** · Posted On: 6/30/2006 5:14pm

Originally Posted by Omega

Besides the obvious? Throws, Striking, self-defense, weapons, leg locks, non gi work. Before you answer remember they do some of that now but they went and crossed trained with other styles to do so. Everybody agrees with cross training. And has it's been said by me so many times this past 30 days ,I can't even count them, you need decent striking, throwing, submission if you want to become a fighter. Not, Wrestling, muay thai and BJJ. Because you can replace those with half a dozen other substitutes. As it was said before, I don't get this attitude or bullshit arguement from purple belts and higher because they've trained hard enough to know the differance.

So wait, what's your point? That you can or can't get those things in bjj? Because they're there now (except for the weapon stuff) regardles of whether the were brought over by whorian from portugal (via spain) in the santa maria.

The nutrider nonsense is erected almost entirely of strawman arguments and posts by bjj newbies who get set straight by other bjj practicioners.

**CanucKyokushin** · Posted On: 6/30/2006 5:48pm

Even though this is not an argument that should include me, I do want to add about this whole "If it weren't for the Gracies" comments that get's on my nerves.Even if the Gracies never existed.Full-contact karate would still be offered,high-school and college wrestling would still exist and so would a few good Judo branches.

The only difference that I could cenceive is that there would be a significantly less number of gyms offering Muay-Thai. So to say that the concept of MIX-martial arts didn't exist before UFC1 or even the Gracies would be taking credit away from those who had been doing it from just as long.Because the Gracies didn't demostrate Mix martial arts but ground fighting.

***Omega Supreme*** · Posted On: 6/30/2006 6:53pm

Originally Posted by UpaLumpa

So wait, what's your point? That you can or can't get those things in bjj? Because they're there now (except for the weapon stuff) regardles of whether the were brought over by whorian:byewhore: from portugal (via spain) in the santa maria.

The nutrider nonsense is erected almost entirely of strawman arguments and posts by bjj newbies who get set straight by other bjj practicioners.

No what it means is that BJJ practitioners cross train too because of holes in their game. Then they claim it for themselves. If it was any TMA doing this you brand them as 'crappling'.

**hapkido_keith** · Posted On: 6/30/2006 8:15pm

Although I agree with Omega (and do make an effort to say "gappling" rather than "BJJ" when I mean grappling) I'm going to play devil's advocate for the sake of the argument.

In order to get a good idea of what BJJ was before cross training was considered beneficial, we have to look back to the early days of the UFC before such cross training happened. Without the benefit of solid cross training in striking, Royce handed everyone their asses. All fell before the mighty power of a pure grappling machine.

Can Royce, or any other pure grappler, do the same in sport MMA today? Matt Huges answered that for us with a definitive "NO." But going back to the question at the heart of the matter:

Out of curiosity, what exactly does BJJ not "offer" that a new martial arts student should prioritize above what it does offer?

This question would depend on just what the student considers a priority.
MMA competition? Cross training is certainly needed, but BJJ will cover the submissions portion of it nicely
Fitness? Grappling will get you fit.
Sport competition? There's plenty of BJJ tournaments to satisfy the most competitive spirit.
Self defense (t3h str34t)? This is the most contested question I think. Based on what happened in the first few UFCs, where BJJ was used without the benefit of cross training and still dominated some pretty good strikers, I would have to say: yes, BJJ by itself will give a student a pretty darn good chance of surviving a street encounter. Certainly a much better chance than a person with no training at all.

**Meager** · Posted On: 6/30/2006 8:45pm

Originally Posted by Omega

Besides the obvious? Throws, Striking, self-defense, weapons, leg locks, non gi work.

My BJJ/MT school works throws (not as much as I'd like though), striking, self-defense (too much for me, I prefer sport MA), weapons (again, I'm not a fan, but we do stick/knife), leg locks and no gi.

To be fair I think the whole style thing is gay. I really don't give a **** what you train as long as you're training realistically with proper instruction. I think one of the best things about BJJ is it's willingnes to steal liberally from whatever works (sambo/wrestling/even catch) instead of getting all hung up on lineage.