Home > Political & Other Important Issues > Leisure > HobbyTime > The Martial Arts Forum > judo good for self defense?

judo good for self defense?

  1. curious if judo is good for self defense?
  2. quick answer is yes.

    most fights end up on the ground and for the most part a lot of grabbing and shoving before you go to the ground. once you have a grasp on your opponent you can throw, control or punish him/her.

    judo was born out of Ju Jitsu......there are many joint locking and chocking techniques that can be used either standing or on the ground. if you are defending yourself against one person and you are confident that you have "submission" skills (judo or JuJitsu) then go to the ground and work from there. if you are defending yourself against more than one person... RUN AWAY....or, put your back to a wall, stay off the ground and do the best you can.
  3. Judo is very useful for self defense as a grappling art. The whole objective of judo is to stay on your feet and put the other person on the ground. Even though I take BJJ I would recommend judo over BJJ for self defense for that reason.

    Wrestling is better than both though, especially since judo has come up with more and more rules (prohibiting grabbing the leg, etc).

    That being said, I do not feel that judo (or any grappling only art) is the only art you should study for self defense.
  4. a judoka (judo player) plays by the rules when on the mat, in training or competition. In the real world, if a fight broke out the judoka has no rules. Its much easier to control and submit a person while on the ground (if its one on one). I would not hesitate to bring my opponent to the ground....taking away his kicking and striking abilities and work my way to an arm bar or choke. if you dont knock me out with your first punch...its going to the ground. unless you are trained in ground techniques......I'm gunna get you. Also the ground minimizes the body size differences...a little guy with technique can control and submit a much larger person....a simple judo arm bar can turn into a dislocated/damaged elbow.....playing without rules.
  5. I would say some of the mechanics of Judo are good for self defense I used Tai otoshi I modified it when grabbed the guys lapels I head butted him kneed to the groin then went into the move results fight over. I am a big guy he was much bigger.

    We have the opportunity to pick and choose different systems here what has worked for me is learning how to box, Thai boxing, BJJ, Japanese Jujitsu, Judo, Wing Chun, Arnis with the exception of BJJ I spent three years with each they all have something to offer next is you have to spare this stuff to make it work.

    Learn how to box boxing trains the hands and big guys respect hand speed you will see.
  6. Tai otoshi good judo throw.............but if you're using it in a fight instead of pulling him over your extended leg and rotating him to his back....you do not rotate.......you just pull him over your leg and onto his face. Tai otoshi is a JuJitsu throw....it was "softened up" when it became one of the 65 throws of judo. i'm a little guy and Tai was one of my favorite comp throws, dont need long legs for it.............all i had to do was trap his ankle.
    glad to see you're well rounded.
  7. One good thing about Judo is that you'll train "actively" - against resisting opponents.
  8. Under duress you will react the same way you train. This is a well established fact in LEO and SD circles. As I've often stated, "we do not rise to the occassion, we sink to the level of our training".

    Dermott 'Pat' O'Neill at one time was the highest ranked non-Japanese Judoka in the world. He, along with Fairbairn, Sykes, Applegate et al created WWII combatives, which is quite probably the most effective, brutal SD system ever developed. When asked why Judo techniques weren't included in the WWII system, O'Neill responded, "Judo is useless in combat unless the enemy is wearing a Gi". Of a note, Fairbairn was also a Judoka having had his cert signed by Jigoro Kano Sensei himself.

    This is not to slight Judo or offend any Judoka. But Judo is a sport and was designed to be a sport. I again refer to the link in my first post as it touches on the 'why' of the matter.

    Other links that explains this is;

    Practical Karate

    How effective is it...really?

    Sure to make some readers angry
  9. An actively resisting opponent (singular). And an opponent that is abiding by the same rule set as you, without a weapon or assistance in a controlled environment. This is different from a determined attacker. Please see the links in my two posts above for a much more indepth explanation.

    Thank you :wavey:
  10. Do you have a source for these things "Dermott 'Pat' O'Neill" says? Because google only turns up results that you yourself have posted. He sounds like a guy who is experienced, and anyone who says judo is uselsss doesn't know what they're talking about, so it seems contradictory.

    Mulitple attackers? It doesn't matter who you are, you better hope that either they're really bad and out of shape or that you can out run them.
  11. Yes sir, O'Neill

    The link is just to a summary of the article that appeared in the Journal of Asian Martial Arts circa 2003. You'd have to get a back copy of it to view the article. Equate O'Neill to Rambo and you'd have a pretty clear picture of his abilities. In training, he had people come at him full speed with real knives. And if they didn't fully commit to the attack....well, let's just say he educated them.

    The point isn't that a particular Judo technique is useless in a SD situation. It is the way the technique is trained i.e. typical Judo school which concentrates on sport competition. Same can be said for Taekwondo, Karate or any other art's techniques. Again, the technique(s) in and of themselves are not the issue, but the methodology that teaches them. If one can divorce the sport mindset that is in the majority of Judo schools, and train the technique(s) in a pure SD methodology then it becomes effective.

    In otherwords, don't rely on the Gi. Don't look to 'control' the person (unless appropriate to the situation and can be safety done). Train outside. Train on stairs. Train in an elevator. Train in a car seat. Train on the ground. Train against multiple opponents (which isn't difficult and can actually make the fight easier if properly done). Judo techniques to not cover the full range of SD situations, but 'can' be effective on a limited basis in some situations 'if' trained correctly.

    With respect.
  12. It isn't just about techniques. It's about having an excellent base, good balance, and being in shape. All those help in a self defense situation by keeping you off the ground.

    I'll say it before and I'll say it again, any art that doesn't involve sparring at 100% speed isn't worth doing. Things like Judo, BJJ, MMA, boxing, etc are sports yes, but they compete at the same speed and strength one would find in a real fight.

    From easily taking on multiple attackers to sparring with real blades, the whole things reeks of BS. I'm not going to base my training off someone who tells me that I can take multiple assailants, regardless of training. Let's get back to reality.
  13. One can either base their SD training on those that have real world experience, or those that teach theory. Many SD instructors and practitioners have trained successfully against multiple opponents and using things other than rubber knives. If one wishes to train SD, then seek out someone that actually knows SD. Same for sport. They are not one-in-the-same.

    In regards to real blades, it is a historical fact that O'Neill and Fairbairn (and others) used them in training. For myself, I have as also as well as with AK47's (unloaded and from the perspective of using the AK as a physical weapon, same thing with an unloaded/empty/damaged handgun in SD).

    I'm routinely outnumbered on-duty and have been against multiple attackers and successfully defended myself and won the altercation. It is proper tactics, strategy and technique. Many people have. Sport methodology does not cover any of this so it is natural that someone training under that mindset would be unfamiliar with this training.

    All I can say, once again, if you want SD training then listen to someone that does it/has done it in a real world setting and can teach it effectively. That is getting training from someone with experience and not theory.

    It is what it is
  14. I did Judo in college. For me, on the street I see it as good defensive techniques, for use when the threat level is low (eg dealing with a drunk) and you don't really want to create a long lasting injury. On the other hand, if I need to take it to them and go on the offensive....then boxing is the only way to go.
  15. Pretty much. Some type of legitimate striking for keeping them at length and some type of legitimate grappling to keep you off the ground or to help you get up/dominate them if you happen to get taken there. This coupled with situational awareness and common sense and you should be able to escape 99% of encounters.
  16. +1

    Judo may not be the "ultimate" martial art, but at least they train at full speed. There's not much "grab my wrist" action going on :)
  17. Accept for 'REX KWON DO'!

    "Break the wrist, walk away" :rofl:
  18. Why is boxing the only way to go? What is wrong Muay Thai or Savate?
  19. Frankly, I think someone should study and extract the best techniques from all of the arts. my black belt is in gojuryu, but I started off in judo and studied a whole bunch of different ones on the way.

    Related to the Olympic medalist getting "beat up". I'd want to know the circumstances surrounding that more. was he drunk, totally unaware of surroundings and taken by surprise, etc.

    As to taking on more than one opponent at a time. Friend who took his black belt test same time I did was jumped by four guys and successfully defended himself; but no one should count on being able to do that. circumstances just worked out for him that time. if they'd been slightly different, they might not have. I've sparred multiple opponents many times and it is flat out hard work even if you're in great shape. even if you're "fighting" several, you need to move so you're actually just dealing with one at any moment.

    One should practice with weapons too. you may not farewell going empty handed to a knife or gunfight. I've practiced knife and gun defenses big time (and have scars to prove it) and know I'd have a legitimate chance of disarming someone if they're close, but I'd much prefer to stay out of range and use my own weapon or not play at all.

    Finally, I think the training itself is one of the big advantages. being physically fit, being alert and being conditioned to respond are huge. A friend and fellow student was a state police swat team member. one time we were talking and he said that most of the drunks and thugs he had to deal with on the job appeared to be going slow motion after working out with us in the dojo all the time.
  20. This is the most important thing. Whatever art you train you need to train against resistance. All sport based martial arts do this. This is were many traditional and reality based martial arts fall short.
  21. Everybody who is anybody studies Krav Maga in full tactical gear these days. :mallninja:

    I have a black belt in Tae Kwon Do and its been helpful on a couple occasions with basic blocks and strikes. But I wouldn't consider it a super effective combat system. Although I can't fault it for keeping me from getting hurt when I needed it.

    I've done some fencing, just in case I ever find myself in a random sword fight. :duel: Seems to happen all the time in the movies.

    But these days I focus on America's martial art. Gunfighting. :2gun:
  22. This 100%. There is so much BS being spewed in the so called RBSD world it's unbelievable. Google bullshido.
  23. Judo is a sport which does a very good job of letting you go all out against an opponent.
    I personally think judo is a very good foundation for a martial art (I did it for one year and wrestled for two).
    Myself, I practiced aikido for twelve years, but I also used to work on punching and kicking a heavy bag and a speed bag on the side. Also, a friend of mine had a black belt in aikido and tai kwan do and we used to spar.
    My father in law (8th dan) ran his own dojo in korean karate for forty years, and we got to BS'ing one night and it was amusing to hear him say that he would not want to fight a wrestler.
  24. I had the privilege of grappling with a 3 time mma world contender this summer and from a boxing and karate background it was a hoot. I spent time laughing as I'm getting my arse wooped.
  25. Gojuryu-- Mas Oyama , I believe went on from there

    It was Full Contact
  26. A larger "red neck" tried to screw with one of my sons.
    He landed badly knocked the air out of him.
    My son looked down and said, I am sorry, you
    did not how to fall.
  27. gun > knife > judo > nothing.
  28. Was just talking about Judo at work earlier. One of my Co-Workers is a 7th degree black belt and has won several Olympic medals. She trains Olympic, Kodokan, and freestyle, and will let Co-Workers and family train for free, so I'm thinking about starting Judo with my two sons. I've done a bit of Krav, and some BJJ, but can no longer afford to participate with myself and two sons, so this seems like a good alternative financially.
  29. As the saying goes, "If you are fighting fair, your tactics suck". As Deputydave said, "Under duress you will react the same way you train." So, if you train in a sport, pad up, fight with rules, are used to having referees, etc, , then in a SD situation on the street, under extreme duress, you are likely to perform exactly the same way you train. I once heard an old Japanese master sum it up this way; " There is a VERY big difference between sport karate and self defense karate. Sport karate is about winning, self defense karate is about NOT LOSING." Very often, self defense is all about delivering a single very powerful, very effective, (possibly highly damaging) technique and thus allowing you to the escape and evade your opponent....not about standing toe to toe in battle as is often depicted in movies and on TV.

    Many good points have been made here reguarding the fact that all styles of martial arts teach balance and body awareness as well as improve physical fitness. In our style of training we often elude to the fact that in a conflict, both opponents being of relatively equal skill, the one that is more in shape has a very large advantage. Physical fitness counts in self defense!

    I have trained mostly in striking styles with less time spent grappling. In my experience grappling techniques take more time to effectively master than striking techniques. A poorly delivered strike can still be effective enough to stun your opponent and allow escape, but an improper grapple or throw now puts you in close range with your opponent, now affording them an opportunity to grapple or strike back. For that reason, I consider learning a striking SD style superior to grappling styles for basic self defense. The student will more quickly learn the basic techniques needed for rudimentary self defense. That's why when we teach "Self defense" classes to novices we teach basic striking techniques. However, that being said, if the student intends to train diligently with ANY style and learns to master the style, any style becomes exceedingly effective as for self defense. So generalized statements on which style is best do depend somewhat on you intent on either committing to a style long term vs simply taking a few classes to learn the basics.

    In my opinion, learning basic striking, eye gouges, groin strikes and other high yield strikes is easier than learning to be effective with a judo throw or a grappling hold, the latter two simply taking more time to master.
  30. then there is chair
    the one the little guy picks up and wears out the big guy trying to hurt them.
  31. 1st Dan in German Jiu-Jitsu here (mixture of Judo, Karate, Aikido, Thai boxing and Taekwondo). In a fist or even knife fight it is very helpful, not so much when firearms come to play unless the opponent gets very close and can be distracted. I rather walk out of any confrontation or rely on my G42.
  32. Quite right - judo is a sport with its own quite restrictive rules. Great for fitness, endurance and general mobility, though.
  33. Your as wrong about judo as you are about hunting. A good judoka would drop most RBSD/Krav maga/commando killers on their heads.
  34. Odd that the highest ranked non-Japanese Judoka in the world of the WWII era came to the exact opposite conclusion. And then went on to help develop a realistic, real world proven combat system that included ZERO Judo.

    Your assessment is based on biased emotion and not factual data. You may want to reread the thread in it's entirety including the links before commenting.
  35. Dismissing any martial art merely because it is also a sport insures a lack of practice opportunities against a variety of opponents in a variety of locations.

    Depending on any martial sport without also mastering it's combat applications leads to getting your ass kicked or killed by someone who isn't playing.

    It's a yin-yang thing. Don't master one without the other.
  36. Judo isn't also a sport, it is only a sport. It was specifically designed to be a sport from Aiki Jujutsu. As a sport it thus follows the sport training methodology. This is inherently disadvantageous for self defense for all the reasons listed in the links I've provided above. That's why it wasn't included in RBSD systems like WWII combatives or CQDT.

    Doesn't mean Judo sucks, only that while it works well for one specific venue it doesn't work for another. It was meant for sport, not SD. If you want Judo to be for SD then you have to go past Judo and learn it's Aiki Jujutsu principles. Apples and oranges.
  37. No not on emotion at all, experience both on the street and in the gym. RBSD systems like krav are mostly a marketing gimmick. Try any of it on an experianced judo player, BJJ, MMA OR MT guy and you'll get destroyed. Trouble with most so called to deadly to really train hard systems and techniques is they are not pressure tested in a competitive environment. Most RBSD sparring is a joke. It's like a baseball or football player throwing the ball and drilling but never really playing the game. I really wish some of these systems worked like they say it would be a lot easier than hard training. I like the web site linked below, it dispelles a lot of myths.

  38. Okay, what kind of experience do you have on the street? Without getting into a pissing contest with you, I have over three decades of experience when it comes to uses-of-force against violent felons (armed and unarmed). I've taught high liability professionals and civilians for most of that time. I would absolutely NOT teach any sport related martial art such as Judo or TKD or BJJ as it would be a disservice to my students. The methodology is completely wrong, which I've detailed at length in the links I've provided.

    Actually yes and no. What you've experienced probably is a marketing gimmick no different that BJJ is a marketing gimmick to those that are easily impressed but actually don't know how useless it is in the street. By the way, I know Royce Gracie and have taught at the same regional training center. He had to dramatically modify BJJ to make it usable for police because what is commonly taught i.e. the sport stuff is not only useless but detrimental to sound training. Anyway, back to Krav Maga. Krav Maga, like BJJ has a sport side and a combative side. You've only seen the sport side. I know (and can teach) KM as taught by the IDF (which is who taught me). And I have family that were very high up in the IDF as well. It, like their shooting methodology, is combat proven against realworld threats (both armed and unarmed).

    Yes, you keep saying this. But that isn't factual. It is emotional. Oh, perhaps in the controlled environment of a ring, on a flat, dry, level surface with both parties abiding by the same rules. But then an street fight doesn't have any of that. It has no referee, no rules, no nice little water breaks to catch your breath and get a pep talk. And the street poses the very real possibility of weapons, multiple attackers, unfamiliar terrain and other considerations that aren't trained for in a sport setting. Unless you're saying your train with weapons in your Judo training? Or multiple attackers? Or on stairs or inside a car or in an elevator? That is RBSD. And if you haven't seen it practiced full bore, under all kinds of stressors and environments then you haven't really seen RBSD training in it's entirety. That isn't the fault of real RBSD, it is a lack of experience/exposure on your part. I don't say any of this to put you down or sound mean-spirited. But reading your posts indicates you are heavily on the sport methodology side of the equation. That's fine, but that in no way translates to sound self defense methodology.

    For my part, I've gone against BJJ/MMA before in MY environment and on MY terms. They are a known equation due to the way they've been taught. Doesn't mean they're cream puffs but rather they are going to react under stress the way they've been taught. The way they've been taught does not translate well to the street, particularly if you know how to exploit their methodology when it's used outside of the scope for which it was intended.

    This goes directly back to O'Neill and Fairbairn who were among the best Judoka in the world in their day. They knew the limitations of the system and the teaching methodology and knew it would be deficient and detrimental in hard core combatives training. So I would suggest that if two of the best Judoka in the world dismissed Judo as a viable training vehicle for RBSD/combatives then others of less experience should take heed and ask 'why'.

    Again, it doesn't appear you've seen sound RBSD/combatives training or have only seen YT videos that don't show it in it's entirety. But I would also add that one can train hard, smart or both. WWII combatives training was incredibly short but was retained in long term memory and worked on the field of battle. Boatman edged weapon training was incredibly short but reduced Officer-related injuries due to edged weapons from 87% down to 16% within two years of being implemented. Why? Because of the methodology of training i.e. gross motor skill, flinch response and being retained in long term memory with minimal training. Again, data in some of the links I've provided back this up.

    I would add that Bullshido isn't exactly the source I'd use for anything of substance. Oh, I've seen it and read much on the site/board. And I've recognized a LOT of posers and wanna-bees and outright trolls there that have been bounced from more respected venues.
  39. Lots of stuff to respond to. My Ma background. Mostlty JJJ and BJJ. Also boxing, kick boxing, karate, Krav Maga and military combatives plus a few other TMAs. My life experience 20+ years private security and bouncing. At one time I was involved in more physical altercations in a month than your average police officer would be in a decade. Without a lot of backup and just my hands and maybe some OC, against armed and unarmed indiduals. Let's face it most police and military are not the best examples of good fighters, they don't have to be. So yes some of the deadly, LOL does work on billy bad asses in the streetz. And yes I have used pure grappling and striking to great effect in the mean streets. I'm a veteran but unfortunately I've had to deal with many young troubled vets who thought they could hang with me using their deadly combative training, it just did not work for them. Also dealt with my share of violent felons and 1 percenters. Unless they were using weapons NONE of them were as tough/dangerous as a clean cut high level collage wrestler and you know it.

    You may be correct and I haven't found the true krav or RBSD system kind of like a unicorn. Not saying it does not exist and you definitely have a lot of experience in the training environment so I may keep looking. Also I have never found one that truly pressure tests their students, but it sounds like yours does and that's what really makes it effective. But IME all the dirty boxing, biting, eye gouging, groin striking, throat striking, small joint manipulation ect. Is NOT going to stop a good grappler from taking you down or standing and choking you out, or a good MT/boxer from knocking you out. A lot of RBSD stories are really undocumented but I'm open minded and will check out some of your links. Stay safe.
  40. Dave your links aren't working, could you post them again or just list some systems you find effective. I'm skeptical but open minded.
  41. Going back I see a lot of links don't work, sorry about that. Let's see what I can fix...









    Okay, that is some to start. Now to be clear, I'm not downing or disrespecting Judo or MMA or BJJ. It's tough training and produces excellent, usually well-rounded athletes. My nephew teaches BJJ and competes and too be honest is pretty damn good.


    It goes back to the training methodology. I stress this over and over because under duress we WILL revert to our training. That can be good if the training is applicable or bad if it isn't. Sport martial arts such as Judo/MMA/BJJ or whatever produce individuals who are well conditioned and generally can take a beating. The training is designed to allow the individual to last for possibly several rounds is some contest venues. No problem with any of that. But again, it is designed around a specific rule set that the single opponent has agreed to abide by and the referee is there to enforce. The venue is a controlled environment. There is no surprise attack, multiple attackers or weapons involved. In the 'street' the objective is to end/escape the conflict as quickly as possible.

    Sound SD training needs to cover de-escalation, escape, evasion, applicable laws, stun-n-run, appropriate level of force, stress response (flinch response). Not all of the training needs to be, or indeed should be a full blown knock down drag out because life isn't always like that. Training needs to allow the student to talk the attacker down if possible. Throw a handful of change in their face and then run. Use an improvised weapon. Use a conventional weapon. And then some of the training needs to be 1% type of resistance that is full out. At least to the level that is sensible.

    In SD it's okay to kick the attacker in the nuggets, use a flashlight to momentarily blind them and then strike/kick/knee them in a high % area to end the fight and escape. Pull a firearm. Grab a rock or break off the antennae on the nearest car to use as a striking weapon. It's okay to scratch into the eyes (Tiger claw in WWII combatives), bite, poke, grab and strike areas of the body that are banned in most competitions.

    In short, the goals are entirely different. It isn't whether a MMA fighter is tougher than a RBSD/Combatives student. For example, elderly grandmother wakes up with a young rapist who broke into her home and is mounting her. She reaches down and grabs his scrotum for all she's worth. The guy strikes her as she covers with the other arm. But she doesn't let go despite getting bloodied and bruised. End story, he's trying to leave the house, literally dragging her behind him as his pants are around his ankles and she's still grabbing his scrotum. To the point his screams wake the neighbors who come out to help get her off of him. He's then arrested and transported to the hospital. Now, grandma isn't a contender for the belt. She's not conditioned. She's not even trained. But she has force of will to survive regardless of how hard she got him and was determined not to be a victim.

    Can some skills in Judo/MMA/BJJ be useful in a real world altercation? Sure. But we need to be mindful of the totality of training and not putting ourselves in a box. In other words, if a MMA person wants to train for real world attacks they need to, at least occasionally, step off the mat in into an elevator, inside a car, in bed, on stairs, on oil soaked asphalt in the parking lot. They need to train in dim light conditions. The need to train against multiple attackers. Against and with weapons. And most importantly...how to NOT fight if it can at all be avoided. Trained in use-of-force laws. Does their state have the castle doctrine? Does it have stand your ground? What are the requirements for a CCW? Is that 'tactical' flashlight or pen allowed and where?

    Touching on fight as you train/train as you fight; if you train to take an opponent down and put them in a rear naked choke or triangle choke or cross body arm bar a thousand times then you'll likely do that under duress. In the ring that's not an issue. In the 'street' it can be a major issue. One of the reasons Gracie had to change what he taught LEO. What he taught was great and top notch. And it was also wrong for the venues the LEO students would fight in.

    Just things to toss out and consider.
  42. I'll check them out thanks for the response.

    I still think the whole street vs sport is blown way out of proportion. Sport based guys can easily do all the dirty tricks and fouling techniques also. They just do them with better conditioning, timing and position. I've used many of the dirty RBSD techniques myself and had them used on me. They still don't work as good as a proper Choke or good right hand. The whole never go to the ground due to glass, dirty needles, lava, ect ..is also way over blown IME. Weapons and multiple attackers are always an issue regardless of your training. But yes some things do work better than others.

    Like I said I'm open minded. But It seems many RBSD guys have drank the kool aid for far to long and believe there own BS. Much of what they are teaching to guys who enjoy larping more than real training or soccer moms that are afraid of guns is going to get them hurt badly. Because no amount of scratching, biting, ball kicking, foot stomping or eye gouging is going to save them from someone with real sport based training, thankfully for them most sport guys aren't into hurting those kinds of people. But heck they really wouldn't stand a chance against a really strong aggressive person either. Those people truly are being taken advantage of.
  43. Folks on both sides drink the kool aid :cheers:

    I come at this strictly from an Instructors point of view. As an example, the infamous Newhall incident from 1970. Four CHP officers were killed in a shoot out with two armed perps. Bad training was partly to blame. Back then, officers were taught in training to 'clean up their brass' i.e. dump the spent cartridges out of the cylinder, pick up the spent brass and stick them in your pockets (to keep a nice tidy and clean range) and then reload. Well, under stress that's what they did. Some were found with empty revolvers, full speed loaders and a pocket full of spent brass. So instead of dumping the brass, reloading and getting into the fight they were picking up spent brass. No, they weren't stupid. They were responding, under stress, exactly the way they were trained.

    These days we teach recruits to drop the mag, reload and get back into the fight. Forget the dropped mag.

    Example #2: Police officer becomes really good at disarms. So when confronted by a bad guy in during a robbery the police officer disarmed the bad guy in text book fashion...and then hand the gun back to the bad guy. Why? Because a thousand times in training his partner presented a rubber gun, he disarmed his partner and then handed the rubber gun back so that he could do it again. Once again, not a stupid cop. Just responding under stress as he trained by rote.

    We don't train that way anymore because of these types of things.

    Gracie at first was teaching cops to take the perp to the ground and put some sort of submission on them. Well, that can be a good thing in some circumstances but bad in others. Additionally, he didn't take into account the officer's wearing a duty belt. Going to the 'ground' on a mat while wearing a gi or shorts is quite different than going to the 'ground' on actual ground/concrete/asphalt wearing a duty belt and body armor.

    As far as a civilian, why would a man or woman want to take a bad guy down and remain on the ground with them? Yes, there is a time and place to 'submit' someone. But in general you want to stop the threat and create distance to assess the situation and/or escape to a better location. Look up Fred Crevello. He does Jujutsu 101 and is incredible. He taught at the same place that Gracie and I taught. He's a very small man but can still roll people up into pretzels. But he also shows the weaknesses of trying to grapple. Particularly if the other is armed, specifically with a knife or firearm. Edged weapons is one thing I teach. I carry an edged weapon, which I call a 'safety tool' in a location specifically available should I have to grapple with someone.

    There are no absolutes in this area but these are just some things to toss out for consideration.
  44. True, but more so with the TMAers and RBSDer, at least the sport guys are actually doing it. No katas, one step sparring or red man training. Really sparring and rolling
    But I understand that's not how you teach

    As far as going to the ground goes. Going to the ground on purpose or by accident has many advantages for the smaller and not as strong person. I was a competitive power lifter but small by bouncer standards. Many large guys I do not want to trade punches or slams with. But on the ground much of their advantage disappears and can quickly be choked out. NOTHING that I know of has as higher percentage at shutting someone down as one of the various blood chokes.

    As far as civilian SD, that's a different deal and on much we can agree. But I was not talking about sucker punching, err.. I mean preemptive striking and running away, I was talking purely fighting and winning in the ring or on the street. And mainly that your average TMA or RBSD guy would not be able to deal with a well conditioned sport guy in the ring or on the street.
    That's for sure. And again I'm no expert and do not spend the time on this stuff that you do. I've always considered myself an average martial artist who is good at at certain techniques and yet Jiu Jitsu and my limited striking skills have served me well.
  45. Are you trolling? Have you ever been choked out? Been pinned by an arm bar? Been thrown to the ground on concrete?
    Yes, it is a sport. What does that mean? No wristlocks, no punching.
    But, the art allows chokes and arm bars and lots of ground work (wrestling).
    I personally would not want to wrestle in a street fight, but preaching that judo is not useful for self defense does not convince me of your credibility.
  46. No, that is what you're doing. It doesn't appear you've read the thread, nor the information in the links provided.

    It's been attempted, it was unsuccessful.

    It's been attempted, it was unsuccessful.

    It's been attempted, it ended after I threw them to the ground on concrete (and other surfaces).

    Of course it is. And as a sport it suffers from the limitations that prevent it from being the best way to train for self-defense. For all the reasons that I have gone into detail about as well as the authors in the links you've failed to read.

    You're a faceless troll on the internet. I'm unconcerned whether you believe in my credentials or not. Those that know me, and have trained under me, which number over a thousand are convinced of my credentials, experience and skill set. I'm not responsible for your safety nor do I have to go through a door with you so believe what you wish. If you want to jump into a conversation you know nothing about, and clearly demonstrate the fact you know nothing...well, that's on you.