BJJ limitations

[TylerDurden]

Oh definitely. Nothing is perfect and complete. Even if an art covers the basics in everything they will still come up short against someone who specializes in an area.

It's impossible to cover everything, there just is not enough time to train it all.

[gaittec]

To say that the lack of striking is a limitation of BJJ is like saying the lack of heart surgery is a flaw of podiatrists. The very reason BJJ is so effective is that it can be trained for extended sessions day after day at full speed. No striking art can do that.

Now, you could rightly claim that it is important to learn striking. That is why people cross-train. BJJ is the best at what it does. The techniques, combinations, and stratigies of BJJ are endless. The true mastery of ground fighting takes dedicated and regular training. It's much more than just learning a bunch of techniques. To add any complete standing art into it, would make it less effective as a ground art.

"If you were to walk into a Bjj lesson and saw no striking or throws
i wouldn't even think of joining up." This statement really baffels me.
That's like "If you walk into a Muay Thai class and see no arm locks..."

[spetnatz]

Standup fighting is the initial stage of any fight. The ground fighting stage may or may not follow, acording to the actions of your oponent and yourself. The problem with BJJ is that by focusing almost exclusively on groundfighting leaves the practicioner vulnerable in the initial standup stage and unsure about wether it will be able to take the fight to the ground to use his skills, when that becomes advantageous. A good throw will allow you to start fighting in the ground already in an advantageous position.You may end up in the ground anyway, even without good throwing skills,but you probably will not start the fight from a clearly advantageous position and if due to your lack of throwing ability you are thrown you will start it from a very disadvantageous position.
Every other martial art I know deals extensively with the initial stage of fighting,wether by striking or by grappling.. BJJ doesn´t,because it is concerned almost exclusively with what may happen after the initial stage, and that is why I think it´s more limited in scope than most other arts and its practicioners have a higher need for crosstraining than practicioners of other arts.

[gracilva]

To say that the lack of striking is a limitation of BJJ is like saying the lack of heart surgery is a flaw of podiatrists. The very reason BJJ is so effective is that it can be trained for extended sessions day after day at full speed. No striking art can do that.

Now, you could rightly claim that it is important to learn striking. That is why people cross-train. BJJ is the best at what it does. The techniques, combinations, and stratigies of BJJ are endless. The true mastery of ground fighting takes dedicated and regular training. It's much more than just learning a bunch of techniques. To add any complete standing art into it, would make it less effective as a ground art.

"If you were to walk into a Bjj lesson and saw no striking or throws
i wouldn't even think of joining up." This statement really baffels me.
That's like "If you walk into a Muay Thai class and see no arm locks..."

The only way a Bjj practitioner can work his game is by striking,
throwing or taking down his opponent.
Muay thai can still be effective without armlocks.
Bjj can not be effective unless you get your opponent on the ground.
See not so baffling.

[rambo]

I agree that BJJ lacks in standup fighting technique and BJJ experts usually recognize that, advising that judo or wrestling classes should be taken together with the BJJ classes.

[alwaysmixwell]

even though BJJ lacks standup skills its a proven fact that 95% of fights go to the ground.. and if you dont feel that you can match an opponent in striking you can take him down by shooting or going into a clinch.. you can use a simple low leg kick to confuse an opponent and then shoot in.. ive heard some people on this thread saying fights start standing up.. yes thats true, but thats only the beginning. i dont know ive seen enough BJJ vs striking fights to make it fact for me. i hate to brin up the gracies but they have perfected BJJ to a science which is proven in their gracie in actions videos.. Also all the early UFC's ive watched its has to mean something to see all these fights come out to the grappler.. and i see that street fighting is different but the basic ideas of a fight is that it will go to the ground so why not specialize in that ?? Thats just what i think

[CKD]

The only way a Bjj practitioner can work his game is by striking,
throwing or taking down his opponent.
Muay thai can still be effective without armlocks.
Bjj can not be effective unless you get your opponent on the ground.
See not so baffling.

Muay thai will not be effective if you are tackled to the ground and end up on bottom. Bjj can be effective then. The only way a muay thai guy can work his game is by studying standup grappling and throws. Muay thai is just as incomplete as bjj. You did not make any point with that post. It is a lot easier to take the fight to the ground than it is to keep it standing up. I personally think most fights end up on the ground also. Rodney King who is one of the best standup coaches in the world has ended up on the ground working as a bouncer. BJJ does have standup striking and plenty of standup grappling. They are part of the vale tudo portion of bjj but bjj ussually advocates striking in the clinch. If you get bjj books you will see standup striking and grappling. You made no point man.

[gracilva]

Muay thai will not be effective if you are tackled to the ground and end up on bottom. Bjj can be effective then. The only way a muay thai guy can work his game is by studying standup grappling and throws. Muay thai is just as incomplete as bjj. You did not make any point with that post. It is a lot easier to take the fight to the ground than it is to keep it standing up. I personally think most fights end up on the ground also. Rodney King who is one of the best standup coaches in the world has ended up on the ground working as a bouncer. BJJ does have standup striking and plenty of standup grappling. They are part of the vale tudo portion of bjj but bjj ussually advocates striking in the clinch. If you get bjj books you will see standup striking and grappling. You made no point man.

Yes i did make a point, its not my fault you couldn't see it.
I will try one more time.
I stated in an earlier post that if i walked into a bjj class
and they didn't teach takedowns, throws or strikes
i wouldn't even think of joining.
That comment was compared to "if i saw no armlocks in a muay thai
class" i wouldn't even think of joining.
The big difference is without armlocks, a M/T fighter will still KYTFO.
Now, without striking, throwing or taking down Bjj would be preety
useless in a real life fight.
So my point was M/T without armlocks= still effective
Bjj without striking,throwing or takedowns=ineffective

[CKD]

Bjj without striking,throwing or takedowns=ineffective

You have seen some pretty pathetic schools if there is no takedowns. I think bjj can be effective without striking but you can not get a dude on the ground without the takedowns. If you go into any gracie, sauer, or machado affilate you should see some striking and a lot of takedowns. If they are not affiliated with those people they are probaly a mcdojo.

[rambo]

You just have to look at the bjj scoring system to notice that bjj doesn´t emphasize standup grapling at all. A perfect throw that would score an ippon in judo and would destroy an oponent on the street, is only awarded two points in bjj, one of the lowest scores for any move in a bjj tournament.

[El Mastero]

BJJ is a nice art for ground fighting but their style is not unbeatable. As a matter of fact there are two reasons why the Gracies moved to the U.S. One, is money. They can make tons of cash and have made tons of cash off of gullible Americans who have watched the UFC. The second reason they left is because they got tired of their art always getting trashed by the real best fighters out of Brazil. It's a style that was purposefully ommitted from the UFC because the Gracies knew that they would have their asses handed to them. That style is Capoeira. Capoeira is the greatest fighting art to ever come out of Brazil. Capoeira mestre's would always win against the Gracie's in and out of the dojo. They were even barred from fighting in the Vale Tudo because their areal kicks would always confuse the ground fighters who couldn't take all of those flashy kicks. If you want to see Capoeira in all it's glory then rent the movie, "Only the Strong". It will change your life.

[BadgerFu57]

BJJ is a nice art for ground fighting but their style is not unbeatable. As a matter of fact there are two reasons why the Gracies moved to the U.S. One, is money. They can make tons of cash and have made tons of cash off of gullible Americans who have watched the UFC. The second reason they left is because they got tired of their art always getting trashed by the real best fighters out of Brazil. It's a style that was purposefully ommitted from the UFC because the Gracies knew that they would have their asses handed to them. That style is Capoeira. Capoeira is the greatest fighting art to ever come out of Brazil. Capoeira mestre's would always win against the Gracie's in and out of the dojo. They were even barred from fighting in the Vale Tudo because their areal kicks would always confuse the ground fighters who couldn't take all of those flashy kicks. If you want to see Capoeira in all it's glory then rent the movie, "Only the Strong". It will change your life.

And that's why Mark Kerr beat the shit out of that one capeira dude in Brazilian Vale Tudo? Especially since Mark Kerr was only a wrestler and didn't know any submissions. I think the capoeira guy was mestre Hulk or something.

[TylerDurden]

Because as everyone knows, movies are the best place to get information about reality.

However if you want the ultimate you should become a Ninja. Remember only a Ninja can kill a Ninja.

[kodankan]

BJJ is a nice art for ground fighting but their style is not unbeatable. As a matter of fact there are two reasons why the Gracies moved to the U.S. One, is money. They can make tons of cash and have made tons of cash off of gullible Americans who have watched the UFC. The second reason they left is because they got tired of their art always getting trashed by the real best fighters out of Brazil. It's a style that was purposefully ommitted from the UFC because the Gracies knew that they would have their asses handed to them. That style is Capoeira. Capoeira is the greatest fighting art to ever come out of Brazil. Capoeira mestre's would always win against the Gracie's in and out of the dojo. They were even barred from fighting in the Vale Tudo because their areal kicks would always confuse the ground fighters who couldn't take all of those flashy kicks. If you want to see Capoeira in all it's glory then rent the movie, "Only the Strong". It will change your life.

Hahahahahahahaha.......oh...your not joking. thats sad. capoeira is now considered a dance art not a martial art.
the reason- the original practitioneers designed it to look like a dance. They would tape knives on their feet to make it deadly. without the knives it is just a dance again.

[gracilva]

You have seen some pretty pathetic schools if there is no takedowns. I think bjj can be effective without striking but you can not get a dude on the ground without the takedowns. If you go into any gracie, sauer, or machado affilate you should see some striking and a lot of takedowns. If they are not affiliated with those people they are probaly a mcdojo.

I havn't seen them but i have heard of them, and yes i agree on
the mcdojo schools.
i think they are traditional m.a schools
that are trying to mix some Bjj moves in without having a high
ranked Bjj'er or a Bjj dropout.