To Gi or not to Gi, that is the question

**dweidman** · Posted On: 7/03/2007 1:31pm

This last weekend, someone mentioned that it is better to learn groundfighting with a gi initially. The reason, however, was interesting: it was because you use less strength, power, and speed when you have a gi on -- and because a Gi slows things down...

Is this the case? Can someone confirm this?

I can't imagine that it is the case ... but I have been wrong before.

My reasons for no gi -- is that any techs that work without a gi should work with a gi as well - but not the other way.

Thanks,

-Daniel

**artard** · Posted On: 7/03/2007 1:34pm

gi is definitely slower and less explosive just watch any grappling tournament or just youtube videos of people rolling and it should be pretty evident. at my school you start with 100% gi grappling/techniques at the beginning and only start to do no gi once you have the fundamentals down and can go to the more advanced classes. I'm a beginner so can't really objectively comment on if this method is the best way but it makes sense to me. however, I'm more interested in competitive jiu jitsu than mma.

**fedeykin** · Posted On: 7/03/2007 1:54pm

the gi opens up a wide range of offensive and defense techniques that are not possible fighting without a gi. this forces you to use a higher level of technique.

the gi changes the clinch/takedown game completely, making it much harder to take someone down cause they can just hold onto you.

all in all tho, training with gi will improve your no-gi game.

**cyrijl** · Posted On: 7/03/2007 2:32pm

gi helps develop position since posture is more important the easier it is for someone to hold on to you

no-gi help develop submissions since not having any 'handles' forces you to pinch your knees for armbars, be in tight with your opponent etc.