Talk:Jujutsu/Archive 1

message: View Point 1
Someone who really knows jiu jitsu, judo, BJJ history really needs to rewrite this whole page.  Its really innaccurate and way off the mark.
Other comments:
# MMA was not founded by Helio Gracie.  Greek Pankration pre-dates it by about 2000+ years.
# Agree, Combat Jujitsu is barely known in the USA.
# I have never found any strong studies on the percentage of fights that go to the ground.  However, I do have some anecdotal evidence.  I randomly collected 100 street fight clips from all over the internet. About 88% of the fights did hit the ground at one point or another.  However, many of the clips stopped short before the end, so the actual number could be higher.  I think its safe to say, that well over 90% of fights will go to the ground when at least one of the attackers is determined to take it to the ground.
66.27.113.222 00:31, 3 January 2006
View Point 2
My comments to your comment mainly relate to issues surrounding point 3). 
There is no accurate statistical evidence concerning the number of fights that end up upon the ground. Obviously not many street encounters end with the participants filling out a questionaire about their tussle. Anybody who uses statistics to justify their point in this regard therfore are making up those statistics mearly to support a viewpoint. It is common knowledge however that fist fights tend to go to the ground unless one or the other protagonists are sufficiently skilled to defeat the opponent with techniques learnt from martial arts. Modern martial arts training is often woefully inadequate to simulate the brutality of a street fight.
In pre-1900's japan, martial arts abilities were of similar fluency as our ability to use computers. The people of feudal japan led active physical lives, and fighting was much more common place than in todays society. Physical disputes were the norm. They were much more skilled at fighting, and hence were able to defeat each other with techniques that today we consider eclectic. We train far less than a samurai would have done. Thus, we can consider our martial arts as a hobby and not as a time consuming life style. Modern martial artist addopt groundfighting in preference to other systems because of the belief that all fights end up on the ground. However, if we trained properly and daily as the samurai did, likly we would have their perspective.
Also it is important to consider weapons in modern day culture. Streetfights often end in stabbings or shootings. Punishment beatings are also fights, but generally disregarded in the statistics. In many large cities, gang warfare utilizes weapons. In those conditions, groundfighting has little application. You might as well go shooting, learn to use a knife, or swing a machette.
Dbol 23:31, 11 February 2006
View Point 3
Almost all of the above is irrelevant in the argument of the neutrality or accuracy of the page, let alone jujutsu itself.
65.5.148.130 21:17, 20 February 2006
View Point 4
On view point 3: I would have thought that it is better to have more accurate source material pertaining to the various Schools of Ju Jutsu, even though MMA competitions are strictly not traditional Ju Jutsu. Also, arguments or discussions pertaining to street fights, and the validity claims that X % of fights end up on the ground is not a discussion specific to Ju Jutsu. However, it is a debate that the wider martial arts community shares. It seems to me that the viewpoints listed directly above view point 3 are not irrelevant as asserted by the author of VP 3. Such sweeping black and white statements seem to betray the commentators will to prove her/himself right, as opposed to debating the points in question. It is my view that the accuracy of the Ju Jutsu page will always be in question. Unfortunatly, history is painted by those who's speech survives. I reasoned person will take from the article what he/she finds usefull. When two sides directly disagree, one should not seek to neutralize both arguments and replace them with bland non commital statements. In my view, it is better to leave the disagreement in full view, and allow the reader to make her/his mind up for themselves. Ju Jutsu has not the historical paper trail that you find in the Scientific world for instance. It is not as easy to quote objective articles on the history of a system (for instance). Let a person write inaccurate accounts. Somebody else will then counter that account, hence teaching the person who is mistaken.
129.67.4.64 23:06, 26 February 2006
View Point 5
Regarding the percentage of fights that go to the ground.. that depends on what you mean by "fight" in this instance. In my experience, most people who have ever been in a no-quarter situation (self defence with the outcome being restricted to (a) neutralizing the threat, or (b) sustaining severe injury or dying) will do anything to avoid staying on the ground. Also, considering that a simple head-butt, breaking the jaw, or tearing out the eyes, all generally kosher in many less "domesticated" forms of ju jutsu, will tend to send only one person to the ground, I reiterate that it depends heavily on the definition of "fight". I've seen plenty of kids jump onto each other, one lacking the skill or intent to attack with a finishing blow, the other lacking the skill or motivation to handle the "attacker", both frequently having no awareness of their balance.
Really, the term "ju jutsu" as applied by English-speakers, covers a very wide spectrum of physical activities. Some styles are form-training only, others competition, and yet others intended for no-quarter, with a large number simply being whatever the last Soke who bothered to change it left it as. Some, generally ones such as BJJ, emphasize grapping, submission and ground work. Others deal with armored combat. Some train with full contact at all times; others prohibit any physical contact. In general, ju jutsu appears to not be considered as including weapon arts in the west. This is mostly due to that part of the curriculum not being taught in the west, for much the same reasons as many dojo forego the traditional hakama: adaptation to the modern consumer. Hontai Yoshin ryu is a ju jutsu lineage featuring e.g. six-foot staff; Kukishin ryu is another ju jutsu lineage, featuring e.g. sword, armored grappling, spear, halberd.
In short, as clobbered as this term has gotten (never mind its various spellings, and the resultant variations in pronounciation, of which one of the more common ones comes across as something vulgar related to genitaliae, as I recall), it is unlikely we will ever see this page stabilize in any form that is both useful and NPOV at the same time, unless a consensus can be reached on what the page should cover. Personally, I'd prefer having the page specifically cover ryu-ha that are listed as ju jutsu schools in the Japanese martial art geneologies registry, and have it link to a page covering derivative and mixed arts.
As one person suggested, how about letting ju jutsu be the article about the japanese combat arts who name themselves so, such as Daito, Kukishin, Hontai Yoshin, Tenshin and Asayama Ichiden, and letting the other spellings direct people to articles about the other arts, preferrably cross-linking the articles with a comment about the confusion? 212.169.96.218 02:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This entry is wrong in so many ways 

message: *66.27.113.222 00:31, 3 January 2006
Made a small edit, primarily replacing "since most fights end up on the ground anyway" with "arguing that most fights end up on the ground"  for npovness.  I'm a strong believer in ground-fighting, but I think that the typical "90% of fights end up on the ground" claim is an overstatement.  Even my BJJ friends don't think this way.
On a seperate note, does anyone have references for the sport competition section?  Blowfish 17:57, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  misc 

message: Are jujutsu practitioners called jujutsuka? Shawnc 14:41, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK someone from Japan has informed me that they are. Shawnc 14:55, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Jujutsu practitioners

message: Perhaps it should be mentioned, that in Germany "jujutsu" and "jiu-jitsu" are different things.
There is a contradiction between the english and the german version of this article.
Could you elaborate on this? I'm from Australia, and consider "Jujutsu" to be the family of traditional Japanese arts (e.g. Daito-Ryu Jujutsu, which Aikido's Taijutsu (body techniques) were based on), whereas I would consider "Jiu Jitsu"/"Ju Jitsu" to pertain to BJJ and similar more modern arts. I consider there to be a great difference between the two with Jujutsu focussing largly, I believe, on throws and locks applied to the opponent's arms and wrist, normally from a standing position, contrasting with jiujitsu's focus on ground-fighting and competition. As such, I think there should be two articles - One on traditional Japanese Jujutsu, and one on BJJ, ground-fighting, and perhaps even other forms of wrestling. As there is already an article on BJJ (and another on MMA), I think this article's focus should remain on the traditional Japanese Jujutsu, but "Jiu Jitsu" and "Ju Jitsu" should redirect to the BJJ article, not this one. Or perhaps a disambiguation page is needed... BTW, my experience is in Aikido (1st Kyu), so I don't actually know very much about BJJ. - Dave3141592 01:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jujutsu... Jiu-Jitsu? 

message: I trained with the LAPD training officer who developed their defensive tactics training program. He hired, amongst others, the gracies, and Benny "the jet" to help develop the program. They used medical doctors to help limit liability. This was in response to officer injuries and lawsuits from injured suspects.
Dbol 00:11, 12 February 2006
Their study said that 60% of officer incidents of use of force go to the ground. But of course - most of the time officers are trying to get suspects to the ground to facilitate handcuffing. This study, and this statistic have been misused for over a decade to sell groundfighting systems. The number is no where near 80% or the 90% quoted by groundfighting schools.
I have personally trained law enforcement, military, and protective services personell. I have personally witnessed and been involved in breaking up over a dozen "street fights". I have never witnessed one where both participants wound up wrestling on the ground. Frequently one combatent is knocked to the ground where multiple opponents kick him, or the other party walks away.
The only encounters I have seen both parties go to the ground have been law enforcement making an arrest or in the ring in a UFC fight.
Everything below the historical information needs to be edited. It is untruthful at best, written with an agenda, and written in a way that is not appropriate for an encyclopedia entry.
Marketingcomet 21:56, 9 January 2006
I like this description. Incidently, did benny "the jet" take his nick name from the elton john song or was benny around in the 70's?
Dbol 00:11, 12 February 2006
That does sound interesting.
Do you have any quotable sources? HaakonKL 14:39, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ground fighting