Anonymous
Anonymous asked in SportsMartial Arts · 10 years ago

Brazilian jiu jitsu or Japanese jujutsu?

Let's say I'm in a fight with someone who train equally as much as I do exactly.. Who would win? Someone who knows Brazilian jiu jitsu, or someone who knows Japanese jujutsu. Cut to the chase and anwser what I'm asking. I appreciate it.

8 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    10 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    It is hard to pick a clear winner, the arts both have their strenghts and weaknesses, it's a tough call.

    The Combatants:

    BRAZILLIAN JIUJITSU: BJJ has a lot going for it, especially groundwork. It spars a lot, most ever class session. They compete in their own BJJ styled tournaments. It has great representatitives in cagefightin (The Gracies, Nogueira, Mir, Ayoki, etc.). I haven't seen much of it's striking. It is a bit weak on "self-defense" moves (moves like getting out of a headlock or a full nelson, grabs and stuff you would experience in the street not the cage necessarily). As athletes in a combat sport, BJJ grapplers are usually very fit and tough. They focus so much on the ground that they have few equals. Since they tend to focus on sport so much, I think they are vulnerable to a "dirty fighter (one who is good with foul tactics)" martial artists.

    JAPANESE JUJUTSU: Japanese Jujutsu is the father and grandfather art to so many grappling arts (Judo, BJJ, Sambo, Submission Wrestling, etc.). It definetly has some good tools. It tends to be far more well-rounded than BJJ with it spread out with: striking, throws, groundwork, wristlocks, etc. It tends to be focused on street fighting (no-rules) than BJJ. The type of sparring it does varies. Some do cooperative sparring (sparring with someone without going 100% and making sure no one gets hurt from its dangerous moves), some type of full-contact sparring (like Judo), or mixing in strikes with grappling. The more traditional types seem to do the cooperative sparring while more modern ones do the full-contact type. It has lots of different tools: Kicks, leglocks, chokes, handstrikes, throws, pins, dirty fighting. One of the main advantages compared to BJJ is it's focused on dirty fighting.

    THE FIGHT:

    STANDING: I think on their feet striking, JJ has the advantage. It definetly focuses more on striking than BJJ. So, if it stayed in this area, JJ would probably win.

    CLINCH: JJ has some good Aikido-like and Judo-like throws. BJJ has some Judo-like moves and Wrestling like moves. JJ practices these in the dojo, and maybe in sparring if it allows it. BJJ practices them in the dojo, sparring, and competition. BJJ probably has the advantage here, but, JJ can pull off a throw. I call it a draw.

    GROUND: BJJ has a definite advantage in a pure grappling match. If the JJ guys does full-contact grappling he could hang with a BJJ, maybe even beat him (I recently saw a JJ guy beat a BJJ guy here on Youtube in a grappling match! It should be under, "Japanese Jiujitsu vs. Brazillian Jiujitsu" Then go to the vidoe with Tyler Aimer on the first page. click it. Then on the right in realted videos is a jiu jitsu japones vs. jiu jitsu brasillian video. watch it. that's it). But, if the JJ guy doesnt' do full-contact sparring he will be beaten in a straight grappling match. The main advantage a JJ guy would be dirty fighting on the ground. I haven't seen a whole lot of dirty fighting on the ground for JJ. I'm sure they can though. But, a BJJ guys is so slick on the ground, the BJJ guy has this category.

    So, there are the 3 areas of a general one-on-one fight.

    The JJ fighter comes in looking to strike, throw, groundfight, whatever. The BJJ comes in looking just to takedown and grapple. The JJ throws some strikes the BJJ guy handles them. The BJJ guy shoots for the legs. The JJ guys is uncustomed to wrestling shoots for the most part and succumbs to the shoot. On the ground the BJJ guy out wrestles the JJ guy, put him in postion, and submists him.

    WINNER: BRAZILLIAN JIUJITSU OVER JAPANESE JIUJITSU (SUBMISSION)

    I would say it would turn out this way. But, it all depends really. I just have a lot of respect for the BJJ's full-contact sparring and competition training. I am a Japanese Jiujutsu practioner by the way also. I would like to think, with more experience, I could take a BJJ guy. But, I would have to really excel in dirty fighting to do so, otherwise, the BJJ's moves are too sharp overall. BJJ can nullify striking, do ok in the clinch, and be quick and deadly as an andaconda on the ground.

  • 3 years ago

    Japanese Jujutsu

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    This Site Might Help You.

    RE:

    Brazilian jiu jitsu or Japanese jujutsu?

    Let's say I'm in a fight with someone who train equally as much as I do exactly.. Who would win? Someone who knows Brazilian jiu jitsu, or someone who knows Japanese jujutsu. Cut to the chase and anwser what I'm asking. I appreciate it.

    Source(s): brazilian jiu jitsu japanese jujutsu: https://tr.im/cyj9l
  • 10 years ago

    You cant call it, just depends on their skill and the way the fight happens to go. BJJ is all about the groundwork and the takedown really. JJJ uses throw's and locks aswell. If you get a lock on from standing then nice well done. If you throw or get taken down then your in the ground fighting game, and JJJ does ground fighting aswell. so you just cant call it.

    Also janderson1229 has a very warped view of what they think JJJ is, fighting in armour with swords? erm no, the point of JJJ was to give a means of defending or attacking once you no longer had your weapon or never had one in the first place, against either an armed or unarmed oppenent, targetting joints and parts of the body were armour wouldnt help against attacks. I dont recall ever being required to train in anything but my gi when at my jitsu dojo, and i dont recall ever reading or seeing anything that would make me think that wearing a gi wasnt how JJJ was traditionally taught

    Source(s): 4 years Jitsu 1 Year Aikido MMA
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 10 years ago

    Japanese Jujutsu was created for close quarters combat with full Samurai battle armor on. Brazilian Jiu Jitsu on the other hand is more modern, and is more applicable for modern day usage.

    In today's world your not going to be wearing armor, your not going to be caring swords, your going to be in regular clothes, most likely unarmed, and that's where BJJ really comes into play because your opponent may be bigger, stronger, ect ect. And BJJ relies on leverage, and technique over strength and size.

    I'm not trying to put down the traditional martial arts because they have paved the way for everything we have today in the martial arts world, but traditional rarely works in the real world today.

  • Susan
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/awhJM

    Brazilian Jujitsu is something that adapted to the modern day world and is very good for tournaments. Japanese Jujitsu was created during wartime to fight and kill enemies. Later on, Jujitsu was used to only defend yourself. Japanese Jujitsu changed as well through time but ko-ryu Jujitsu which is the original Jujitsu created during wartime teaches all weapons(used during that time) and ways to deal with them as well so it was definitely rare for Jujitsu fighter to know how to use swords and knives. Therefore, Japanese Jujitsu does not go to the ground right away since it was used to fight off multiple opponents and going to the ground in those days meant death. So it has a lot of technique from the standing position as well along with some light strikes used mostly to surprise the opponent. Brazilian Jujitsu took away all that since it's not necessary for tournaments so it's a much simpler form of fighting. The reason why Japanese Jujitsu has flying armbars, and other submission moves similar to that was to take out the enemy right away. They also have quick throws and submission moves from standing position. So basically, Brazilian Jujitsu is something that changed the strategy of Japanese Jujitsu and took out all the techniques to fight better in tournaments and found the best ways to fight one on one. Which is to take them to the ground, take time, and submit them. One thing's for sure is that it's not something that evolved out of Jujitsu but adapted. BJJ proven and told to be one of the worst style to fight multiple opponents is a good example.

  • 10 years ago

    BJJ would win... JJ is a great art in itself but has outdated it's design. It was designed for multipe attackers. Keeping it on the feet and really getting an opponent to the ground however it be a toss etc. a grounded opponent is a much easier defenseless target for a samurai strike with a sword.

    current day fight hand to hand combat and BJJ guy grounds and rips a JJ guys arm off or chokes him unconcious. Whichever he feels like.

  • 10 years ago

    My money is on the BJJ. (but not much).

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.