Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

Talk:Brazilian jiu-jitsu

Not effective self-defense?

This unsourced and rather ungrammatical line at the beginning seems more like an attempt to discredit BJJ than to add to a reader's general knowledge:

"BJJ is not considered effective self-defense by many due to its grappling and grappling only."

Intuitively, I could understand that if BJJ is focused *only* on grappling that this leaves its students to fend for themselves in a striking fight, but:

(1) Is this indeed what BJJ does? and (2) Does anyone have a source for this?

I'd say we should strike the entire sentence unless someone could supply affirmative answers to the above two questions. Tks Jkp1187 (talk) 18:00, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The most important part of self defence is weapons training. Weapons like ASP or tonfa are or Bo which you can find everywhere gives us a great chance to win a fight especialy if the apponent is armed with stick or a knife. The second most important factor is Atemi Waza which has a high range and can make grappling impossible. The third factor is getting rid of the apponent as fast as you can, so his mates won't strike you to death. When it comes to grappling, the first apponent should be thrown as fast as possible to face the next guy. BJJ competetions take between 5 to 10 minutes and that is really dangerous in the real life. Beside all these, you can finish off your apponent by useing pressure points almost with no effort.BJJ offers people none of these. If all these were past the apponent could be taken to the ground and finished off with a shime waza(choking) or with a kansetsu waza(joint locking) but absoloutly not in the begining.for resources that you asked I should name the book, gracie jiujitsu by Helio gracie himself or mastering jujitsu by Renzo Gracie. If you need a link to these books I would be glad to help.Thks MohammadGhenaat (talk) 04:47, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • When was the last time you walked down the street and found a random tonfa or bo, exactly? Absurd claim. BJJ has a long history of effective use in self-defense situations, many of which can be found in a few seconds on either YouTube, or even WorldStar. Also, you claim the length of matches to be a rationalle for it not being effective in a real fight, but I would implore you to walk into a BJJ school and roll with a black belt at "competition intensity", and see how many seconds the submission takes. If it is longer than 15 seconds I would be very surprised. Pressure point compliance is, for lack of a more appropriate term, bullshit. It doesn't work. I have read the two books you sourced, and nowhere do they say anywhere in either book that BJJ is not effective self defense. To the contrary, in fact, they very much advocate for its use in that context. BasicsOnly (talk) 20:13, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tonfa and telescopic baton can be carried by yourself and bo or small stick can be removed from a tree branch so shut up. A friend of mine took this competition and knocked that black belt under a second with a roundhouse kick to his ribs. Also we were worried about that bjjka but we were really happy to shut their ugly mouthes.pressure points does work and the work in their best shape, and it is a basic of jujutsu. My sensei has knocked me twice with a p.p . When you take him to the ground you can either knock him out with these or put a devestating pain through his entire body. For example just by pushing under his nose you can rotate his head back. If i get into a match and i do not know anything about jujutsu, 15 seconds is enough for my mates to strike that fool to his death. Again, no weapons trainings, no kicking and punching, no p.p, not enough nage waza has made bjj the most ineffective sport for self defence. I am really impressed by your acknowledge about the real fight and kyusho jutsu. Just watch 50 minutes of goerge dillmann's tapes and test the points on yourself. The debate about the reality of p.p has been ended long long time ago. MohammadGhenaat (talk) 05:28, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BasicsOnly is there a particular reason you removed the sources I added to the article about it being a self-defence system? Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 16:10, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I just backdated to the last stable version that I was aware of in response to the rampant vandalism. Please feel free to add any constructive edits you deem fit. I apologize if I removed good work from the article. Thanks for your contributions! BasicsOnly (talk) 16:17, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Too much data on individual fighters

This is an article about BJJ in general. Too much data on individuals, their fights, their win-loss records, etc. is being introduced. Individuals should be mentioned, with WP:RS, as contributing to the art/sport/technique, but nothing more. – S. Rich (talk) 16:06, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your rationale, but Helio is one of the founders of BJJ. He heavily contributed to the development of BJJ. Many of his losses led to key improvements in the development of the art. CrazyAces489 (talk) 16:20, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but descriptions of Helio's career should go on his page. In any event, we need secondary sources that describe how he improved the sport. Data about broken arms and defeats in 14 minutes do not describe BJJ or its' development. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 16:30, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Crazy, adding all of that material about Helio is WP:OFFTOPIC because this article is about BJJ in general. You Boldly added it, I Reverted, and now we have a Discussion going on. Following the outline of WP:BRD, I think we need input from other editors IOT bring about WP:CONSENSUS on what is the best way to describe Helio's contribution. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 00:33, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I created a new section. Because BJJ is a hybrid style and famous for things such as the Gracie Challenge where they learn by matches and test it out in order to improve their style I feel it needs to be included. Each match lost brought them back to the drawing board. Additionally, the Kimura vs Gracie match was one of the first televised mixed martial arts contests as well as being attended by the Brazilian President. CrazyAces489 (talk) 00:53, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. But we must write in summary style. These details like a 3 hour, 45 minute fight do not comply with that guideline. Saying "highly touted" may be editorializing (editor intrepretation) or puffery. The last paragraph of the section had no references. Also, the Aloisio Silva Brazilian Jiu Jitsu Academy is not WP:RS. It may have a section about the history of BJJ, but it is really a spamlink (see WP:NOTADVERTISING). – S. Rich (talk) 01:15, 6 October 2013 (UTC).[reply]
I can edit the section and place better sources, but a wholesale deletion is I believe to be extreme.CrazyAces489 (talk) 01:17, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes WP:BLOWITUP is the best course of action. As I say, 1 paragraph had no references and the other 2 had multiple problems with detail and RS. Here is an essay you might find helpful: WP:BETTER. I benefited from reading it when I started off in my editing efforts. – S. Rich (talk) 01:39, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Development After Defeat

Hélio Gracie had competed in several submission-based competitions which mostly ended in him winning. In 1952, Helio would face a former student Valdemar Santana, whom in a 3 hour and 45 minute match, would defeat Helio.[1]. Santana would go on to knock out Helio with a kick to the head. [2]. This would be the last of Helio's matches that involved striking (i.e. Vale Tudo) [3].

− Helio Gracie issued a challenge to a highly touted Judoka named Masahiko Kimura. [4]. An agreement was made under what would be known as the "Gracie Rules" via the Gracie Challenge that throws and pins would NOT count towards victory only submission or loss of consciousness. [5] This played against Judo rules in which Pins and throws can award someone a victory. [6]. Amongst those in attendance in the match was Brazilian President Getulio Vargas in addition to 26,000 people. [7] Kimura would go on to defeat Helio in 14 minutes. [8] Kimura broke Helio's arm during the match with a reverse ude-garami after applying a number of submissions. [9] According to Kimura in his book "My Judo", He thought of Hélio Gracie to be a 6th dan judo at the time of his fight with him in 1951.[1] However, there is no Kodokan record of Hélio Gracie having any dan grade in judo, but it is not unusual for a foreign judoka's actual grade to be higher than that officially granted and recorded by the Kodokan, as Kodokan ranks are maintained independently and have much more strict requirements. His surname the Gracies gave to the arm lock used to defeat Hélio.
− The Gracie family continued to develop the system throughout the 20th century, often fighting full-contact matches (precursors to modern MMA), during which it increased its focus on ground fighting and refined its techniques.[2]

Today, the main differences between the BJJ styles is between traditional Gracie Jiu-Jitsu's emphasis on self-defense, and Sport Brazilian jiu-jitsu's orientation towards competition. There is a large commonality of techniques between the two. Also, there is a wide variety of ideals in training in different schools in terms of the utilization of pure or yielding technique versus skillful application of pressure to overcome an opponent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyAces489 (talk • contribs) 01:05, 6 October 2013

References

  1. ^ http://www.judoinfo.com/kimura4.htm
  2. ^ Peligro, Kid (2003). The Gracie Way: Illustrated History of the World's Greatest Martial Arts Family. Invisible Cities Press Llc. ISBN 1-931229-28-7.

Assessment

This article rates a C-class assessment because it is poorly referenced and it fails to give an overall description of the sport. I moved it with hopes that others will work to improve its quality. Thanks to all who assist. – S. Rich (talk) 09:45, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question

The article suggests that Brazilian jiu-jitsu branched off from "older systems of Japanese jujutsu by an important difference that was passed on to Brazilian jiu-jitsu." Therefore, I believe that it should not be removed from the country of origin. I don't understand why my edits are getting reverted from different anons when I undo the revision. The edits undoing my revision are an unexplained removal of content, but they don't seem to get it or message me about it. Any suggestions? If I revert it one more time, I get violated by 3RR again. Thanks. 3primetime3 (talk) 21:29, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brazilian jiu-jitsu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Brazilian jiu-jitsu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:56, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

propose removing a line in the article

I don't think the following adds anything to the article: "It has also been argued that the Brazilians didn't actually create any fundamental innovations within the art" given that BJJ is clearly a distinct style that, while derived from Judo, is practiced and has evolved into a very different martial art. Even kosen judo which is similar in execution is markedly different from modern BJJ. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BasicsOnly (talk • contribs) 01:42, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: I will delete the line as I think it contributes nothing to the article. Anyone may feel free to revert the change if they object with a clear reason why they think it should be included. BasicsOnly (talk) 03:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae: insists that I get consensus here before I reimpliment my edit. I do not see the line adding anything constructive to the article. I'm happy to discuss with anyone BasicsOnly (talk) 18:42, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"It has also been argued______" should be deleted from every Wikipedia article without discussion. Only keep it if there is a reliable source and a specific person/publication mentioned. (Heroeswithmetaphors) talk 03:42, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the thesis is promoted by Roberto Pedreira in several books, for example The Untold Story of Jiu-Jitsu in Brazil. I don't know what it's worth. CaféBuzz (talk) 06:37, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What does it take to make this article an "A" or FL quality article?

@King of hearts: do you have any suggestions on what you think could be improved?— Preceding unsigned comment added by BasicsOnly (talk • contribs)

IBJJF not major or only governing body

Propose changing sections to reflect that there are actually many BJJ federations/organizations. IBJJF isn't even an actual governing body, though I'll concede that the article can reflect as if it is. I propose adding UAEJJF, CBJJ, CFJJB, CBJJO, and FCJJ.

Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BasicsOnly (talk • contribs) 00:09, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JJIF has also announced itself as the governing body to sport jujutsu systems like bjj. So yes IBJJF is not the only one. MohammadGhenaat (talk) 04:54, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: English 101.02 Writing and Rhetoric I

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 March 2022 and 18 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Badger TB (article contribs). Peer reviewers: TheRealMcCoy0.

"Not teaching or explaining techniques to lower ranked students."

This is under the "Etiquette & Customs" section, which is completely unsourced. Does this even make sense?

DenebDeNoob (talk) 22:43, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Quelle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Brazilian_Jiu-Jitsu