So you think BJJ is effective for street self defense?

[BoarSpear]

Im curious, where do you all get the 90% of all fights go to ground statistic from?

Also who have you been watching deploy blades that gives you the idea you can jump up from a mount before a blade can be deployed and used?

Imagine jumping up from the mount to run only to have him plunge the blade through the top of your foot about 2 inches back from the toes and rip out through the toes?

And whats to keep the guy with the knife from hanging on when you attempt to run?

Suppose a guy with a year of bjj and a couple more years of Kali/silat has the knife (they tend to like knives ) and all you have is bjj...now who has the advantage? It would seem prudent that multiple doctrines of combat should be studied so that even if you choose not to employ it, you will at least know what to expect. If you dont know how a weapon is used, you wont know how to defend against it.

There are some common misconceptions that will get you killed... number 1 of those is running from knife attacks...unless its a hollywood slasher flick most people dont wave the knife around outside 6 to 8 feet...if he is skilled you may not learn he has it until he uses it on you.

Here is another "fun learning experience" give your 10 year old little brother (or son, classmate etc) a rubber knife. Get 8 feet away and tell him to go apeshit on you...try to run... see how far you get. Keep increasing the distance...you will be suprised how much room youre gonna need

Many skilled martial artists added bjj to thier arsenal for SELF DEFENSE and moved on, yet many bjj people cling to the idea its the only system they need learn since they believe it superior to all others...

[aseepish]

BJJ is Vital

When I was a bouncer in my early 20s, I saw many fights go to the ground. The interesting insight that this afforded me was to see what happened to the guys whose friends didn't get there first. They usually got stomped half to death and couldn't get up on their own. On the other hand, guys who managed to stay up while getting jumped usually got away with the worst being a broken nose, black eye or a broken jaw.

Who has the better chance of staying on their feet? A skilled grappler or an unskilled grappler?

For me (a BJJ blue belt, among other things), BJJ is something like insurance. Something to have in case I've screwed up and found myself in a VERY bad situation. First, I've screwed up by putting myself in a place where a physical confrontation is likely. Second, I've screwed up by being unable to diffuse a situation (or I've been ambushed). Third, I've screwed up by not being able to end the fight in punching range or in the clinch and have slipped/fallen/tripped/been taken down. In this case, I would NOT attempt to hold my agressor in the guard, or go for a submission from the top. My first priority would be to get back up to my feet. Bjj gives me the skill to do this.

That said, I would agree that someone who relies SOLELY on BJJ for self-defense could be in for a rude awakening. But we're all cross-training these days, right?

Aside: Something I read on Stickgrappler's BJJ archive from Frank Benn regarding BJJ and multiple attackers: "ground grappling does not necessarily mean YOU go to the ground -- only that HE does". http://stickgrappler.tripod.com/bjj/fbmulti.html

[jubaji]

take the rocks out of your pants, grandpa

Here is another "fun learning experience" give your 10 year old little brother (or son, classmate etc) a rubber knife. Get 8 feet away and tell him to go apeshit on you...try to run... see how far you get. Keep increasing the distance...you will be suprised how much room youre gonna need

...

You can't outrun a 10 year old with an 8-foot lead? How fuckin' slow are you?

[Uke]

Uke, cut the holier than thou nonsense, that's the refuge of those who are pissed because they don't actually have a reasonable argument. I've offered a counter argument to everything you've said; if you're actually interested in discussion, debate, and helping increase people's knowledge, respond to my posts.

I also couldn't help but notice that now you've changed the rules of your game; we can do your football field test starting mounted on the person? That I'd be willing to take you up on; I can get off of someone and start running much faster than he can pull a knife, and though I'll break no records I bet I can lose his friends given a one hundred yard start.

But anyway: respond to people's criticism of your points, or not, of course it's up to you; just don't expect to change anybody's mind if you consider covering your ears and chanting "I don't argue with children, I don't argue with children," a reasoned response.

Let me begin my stating that I have responded to every one of the points offered that had to do with the topic. If you feel that I haven't, please feel free to highlight a point or question that I didn't address. Specifically pose a question or a point, and I will address it immediately.

Secondly, instead of going to a student of a student, I have grappled with an authority on the subject, probably before you knew what BJJ was. Is your instructor higher in rank than Renzo Gracie? While I was living in Hawaii, Relson Gracie himself said that BJJ is better suited for competition and NHB sporting events. Why, you might ask? Its because he knows that in a world without rules, BJJ doesn't prepare you for those kind of realities. But I suppose you and your instructor outrank both of those gentlemen and will refute those claims out of the sheer vastness of your experience.

Do your research, son. Watch the best fight. And watch what position they end up in. They all do. Rickson, Royce, Renzo and Royler Gracie, Rigan Machado, Antonio Nogueira ... they all wind up in the guard, because its the quickest defensive posture a BJJ player can take when someone is swinging at them. The mount is what you earn, not what you simply just take. That's true at least against any half way decent fighter with any amount of power and who is aggressive. BJJ players handle aggression by going for takedowns, but 90% of the time usually wind up going to the guard. The fact that you think you can just jump into the mount in a real fight shows your inexperience. If the mount was such an easy position for a grappler to get, then the guard wouldn't exist. But it does, and it came to be out of necessity, not because jujitsu players like to lay on their backs.

Truth is in the practice and the doing of a thing, not in the debating of it, which is specifically why you were not willing to try that simple exercise. You knew what I was saying was true when you wrote "I also couldn't help but notice that now you've changed the rules of your game; we can do your football field test starting mounted on the person? That I'd be willing to take you up on". But your loyalty to your ideas led you to be disrespectful and argumentative rather than just going out and doing it. When I changed the exercise so that you didn't have to work for your mount and it was just given to you, THEN AND ONLY THEN were you "willing". That tells me that you don't believe in your art, only in preserving your ego.

Lip service never made a man a better fighter. And if you still feel that what you have stated is true, well then I suggest that you step outside the box that you practice in, and try some of those "killer" BJJ moves on someone who won't adhere to the rules that you're accustomed to. But judging from your attitude, you won't. You'll just talk some more.

[Uke]

Who has the better chance of staying on their feet? A skilled grappler or an unskilled grappler?

For me (a BJJ blue belt, among other things), BJJ is something like insurance. Something to have in case I've screwed up and found myself in a VERY bad situation. First, I've screwed up by putting myself in a place where a physical confrontation is likely. Second, I've screwed up by being unable to diffuse a situation (or I've been ambushed). Third, I've screwed up by not being able to end the fight in punching range or in the clinch and have slipped/fallen/tripped/been taken down. In this case, I would NOT attempt to hold my agressor in the guard, or go for a submission from the top. My first priority would be to get back up to my feet. Bjj gives me the skill to do this.

That said, I would agree that someone who relies SOLELY on BJJ for self-defense could be in for a rude awakening. But we're all cross-training these days, right?

Aside: Something I read on Stickgrappler's BJJ archive from Frank Benn regarding BJJ and multiple attackers: "ground grappling does not necessarily mean YOU go to the ground -- only that HE does". http://stickgrappler.tripod.com/bjj/fbmulti.html

Thank you for your comments.
Please read the first post on this topic. I believe that it would address everything you asked and brought up. Not that its necessary, but we seem to agree on what the value of BJJ is. But most of all, thank you for responding respectfully while offering your input.

[Uke]

You can't outrun a 10 year old with an 8-foot lead? How fuckin' slow are you?

Try it indoors and see just how fast that 10 year old is. Its not so much that 10 year olds are fast, but they're nimble because they don't weigh as much. So they can turn corners and shift their weight alot faster than most adults.
Thank for your comments.

[Uke]

Im curious, where do you all get the 90% of all fights go to ground statistic from?

Also who have you been watching deploy blades that gives you the idea you can jump up from a mount before a blade can be deployed and used?

Imagine jumping up from the mount to run only to have him plunge the blade through the top of your foot about 2 inches back from the toes and rip out through the toes?

And whats to keep the guy with the knife from hanging on when you attempt to run?

Suppose a guy with a year of bjj and a couple more years of Kali/silat has the knife (they tend to like knives ) and all you have is bjj...now who has the advantage? It would seem prudent that multiple doctrines of combat should be studied so that even if you choose not to employ it, you will at least know what to expect. If you dont know how a weapon is used, you wont know how to defend against it.

There are some common misconceptions that will get you killed... number 1 of those is running from knife attacks...unless its a hollywood slasher flick most people dont wave the knife around outside 6 to 8 feet...if he is skilled you may not learn he has it until he uses it on you.

Here is another "fun learning experience" give your 10 year old little brother (or son, classmate etc) a rubber knife. Get 8 feet away and tell him to go apeshit on you...try to run... see how far you get. Keep increasing the distance...you will be suprised how much room youre gonna need

Many skilled martial artists added bjj to thier arsenal for SELF DEFENSE and moved on, yet many bjj people cling to the idea its the only system they need learn since they believe it superior to all others...

Couldn't have said it better, Boarspear.

[cam427]

Looks to me like most of the posts on this thread are pure fantasy. Unless the knife supporters are saying that they would defeat three people at once then they would be no better off than the BJJ player (who would also be dead if he stayed to fight).

I have to agree with SamuraiGuy on this one. This conversation is pretty pointless.

I once read a quote from Matt Thornton (www.straightbalstgym.com) where he said that even though he is a trained knife fighter if someone drew on him he would not draw and challenge them to a duel he would just run. Sounds like good advice to me.

[dkm]

Uke,

Although you've made some valid points, your initial scenario of multiple opponents is a scenario where no martial arts would win. You just happened to pick on BJJ. However, you take that same situation for a MT guy or even a Kali guy, it's a no win situation. I can't think of a style that is effective against multiple opponets with weapons. Unless, you have a Uzi.

[Uke]

If you feel that this is fantasy, Cam427, why not try the exercise?

There's nothing pointless about the debate. Either you give it a shot or you don't. You trying to dismiss what has been said is pointless, though.
Even if you take the knife out of the scenario, you still have the 2 friends on the way. If you take the 2 friends out of the scenario, you still have the knife. In the worst case scenario, you have both.

There is nothing fantasy about that. Maybe you lack the real world experience to know just how real these scenarios are, but that doesn't take away from the merits of this debate. On your feet, you have a 100% better chance than on the ground. You can defend yourself against weapons, more than 1 person, and you can run. You cannot do any of those 3 on your back. Anyone who would dispute that you can defend yourself from weapons or more than one person obviously has trained in a system that doesn't address those things ... like BJJ.

And those are the facts, Jack.

[cam427]

If you feel that this is fantasy, Cam427, why not try the exercise?

Why would I bother? I would lose like everyone else would (and like you would). I also believe that training should be done with a healthy mindset rather than spending my life woirrying about all the things that "May" happen to me.

I am not sure about lacking real world experience. I have served 6 years in the army and have worked the last three years as a bouncer and I have found myself in various situations including a situation where I was facing 5 attackers (drunken idiots is probably a better description). Obviously I have not been attacked by large numbers of armed people (or even one armed person) as you so obviously have . Of course this is not true or you wouldn't be here posting these messages.

Your statement that you can defend yourself against weapons is questionable at best. Try the little exercise you set out at the beginning of this post if you dont believe me.

Also I would like to say that despite popular opinion (from people who do not study it) BJJ does not always involve laying on the ground (especially on your back).

FYI: I study BJJ but also Boxing and Judo as I believe they are better at the ranges they specialise in. I am not saying BJJ is the answer to all problems but your "Test" is one that no MA could win.

Cam

[Uke]

Uke,

Although you've made some valid points, your initial scenario of multiple opponents is a scenario where no martial arts would win. You just happened to pick on BJJ. However, you take that same situation for a MT guy or even a Kali guy, it's a no win situation. I can't think of a style that is effective against multiple opponets with weapons. Unless, you have a Uzi.

Thank you for your comments and for the respectful way in which you replied.

I don't know what situations you've been in, but I as well as many other people that I've trained with have been in fights against more than one person. And have won. Just not in the pretty, choreographed manner in which Steven Segal does in the movies. Real self defense isn't pretty and flowery. And anyone who has used it outside of competition will know that. But the point of it is to control an attacker and his weapon/hand before taking him out, which shouldn't take long as your attack should come as a surprise.

Now, if you're saying multiple attackers, and they ALL have weapons, well you pretty much better run, or at least take one out and use the "hostage"
method to get out. I'm not saying that anyone is going to beat a room full of guys that all have weapons. Those were not my words at any point.

But let me clarify the scenarios: Self defense situations don't last more than 10 seconds, while 99.9% of all of BJJ take more than a minute to a couple of minutes. The goal of self defense is to end an altercation, while the goal of BJJ is to tie your man up, get a superior position and either submit him or choke him out, and in either case it would take alot more time to do than straight to the point self defense techniques. If there is a knife involved, a trained self defense man knows that he will most likely get cut. But the difference between a self defense man and a BJJ man is the self defense man chooses where he gets cut. When he parrys the knife hand, he goes into this assuming that his arms and hands will get cut. The BJJ man has no choices and will be knifed in organs, the arms and in the face as he rolls around on the ground.

If you think I'm wrong, go use BJJ on someone, AND AS SOON as you begin grappling with them, tell them to use that marker. Afterwards, tell me what you feel more comfortable doing: Dealing with a knife on the floor or on your feet?

Not even against multiple attackers, just one with a knife.

Again, thanks for the response.

[cam427]

Uke,

Since you obviously have had to defend yourself I was wondering if you could tell me how many fights you have had against multiple opponents and the details of these fights (weapons, injuries you received, number of attackers, how many friends you had with you, etc). Obviously I do not want too many details (for your legal protection).

Also I was wondering what style you do.

Cam

[Uke]

FYI: I study BJJ but also Boxing and Judo as I believe they are better at the ranges they specialise in. I am not saying BJJ is the answer to all problems but your "Test" is one that no MA could win.

Cam

Thank you for your comments, Cam.

The exercise in the beginning of this topic is exactly how a BJJ man would handle aggression. There's no opinion about it. There's no comprehensive stand up techniques in BJJ. Only if you're attempting a front choke, flying armbar or a rolling legbar, all which would put you on the ground again.

You know something, Cam? You are right. No one could win that exercise. That was my point. You don't train in an art to fight one way, so that you can theorize what you MIGHT do later, even though you aren't proficient in those ranges. That would be foolish, wouldn't it? Well then you and I agree on something. So if you RE-read the title of the topic, you would then have to admit that this was about trying to use BJJ as a sole source of defense and offense. And if you only train in BJJ, you'd find yourself in that football field scenario eventually, wouldn't you? All I did was introduce the marker and the 2 friends at the other end of the field ... variables that people encounter every day.

So aside from you smart remarks, what are you supposed to be saying?

[BoarSpear]

Try it indoors and see just how fast that 10 year old is. Its not so much that 10 year olds are fast, but they're nimble because they don't weigh as much. So they can turn corners and shift their weight alot faster than most adults.
Thank for your comments.

actually i used the 10 year old to illustrate the point...when you consider you have to be facing the opponent to see the knife then change direction to run away. Meanwhile the attacker comes in a straight line so you see it isnt as easy as it seems. also while the scenario was on a football field thats far from realistic, its more likely to be in an area that limits you ability to run in the first place. Try that drill in a parking lot full of cars or as you noted indoors...