what is the difference between japanese jiujitsu and brazilian jiujitsu?

Question

which is more effective for self defense?

Answer 1

Japanese jujitsu or traditional jujitsu was created to be used in feudal Japan by the samurai. The techniques used were for grappling, and eventually evolved into Judo, thanks to Jigoro Kano (the founder), who discarded the weapon techniques and anything else he deemed unnecesary. At some point judo and jiujitsu were interchangeable words, since all judo techniques come from jiujitsu.

Judo is a grappling art that includes ground (ne-waza) and standing (tachi-waza) grappling.

Brazilian jiujitsu was created from judo, Helio Gracie adapted the techniques for his phisique (he wasn't that strong), and applied more leverage into it. Gracie Jiujitsu focuses heavily on the ground aspect of the game. Since the art was created (or rather evolved) in Brazil it came to be known as Brazilian jiujitsu.

So, to summarize:

Japanese jiujitsu (or traditional jiujitsu) has techniques for ground, standing, weaponry and so.

Brazilian jiujitsu evolved from Judo (which evolved from jiujitsu), focusing on the ground grappling.

Both are effective for self-defense.

Answer 2

I guess the best answer would be the way it's taught. There is almost nothing in Brazilian Jujutsu that isn't in Japanese Jujutsu/Judo (a "kimura" is ude garami); BJJ just focuses on ground techniques. The thing is, outside of maybe Judo, a Japanese Jujutsoka's first option probably isn't to have both himself and the opponent on the ground in ne waza. It's probably not where you want to be on the streets either, for various reasons (environmental hazards, multiple attackers). It might be better to have a position where you can maintain control/submission of your attacker while still defending against something else. Of course, barring these variables, if a Brazilian Jujutsu guy takes down someone who isn't at least competent on the ground, that guy is in trouble. Just like you wouldn't want to get into a boxing match with a boxer.
However, just because you take down a big guy who doesn't know as much as you on the ground, don't think it's going to be a walk in the park. You still have to contend with his weight/height and find an opening for a technique (so your technique better not suck). And you could have done the same thing without going to the ground.

Answer 3

I would add to some of the good answers here that Japanese JJ tends to favor maintaining your feet or when wrestling that you maintain your position over your opponent as much as you can. Brazilian JJ does not necessarily favor that as strongly and has shown that when you are on your back with your opponent on top of you, maintaining his dominate position he is still more vulnerable and the fighter on the bottom is not as bad off, if he has the proper training, as what most people used to assume.

Answer 4

BJJ came from JJ,duh, but what the gracies did was make it so the smaller guy could submit his opponent while on bottom by using the legs. neither is more effective on the streets. both teach you how to take out a bigger stronger opponent. just cause BJJ students beat JJ students doesn't mean that JJ is less effective on the streets. you only need to know so many positions and submissions against the common thug or drunk

Answer 5

Ever notice the people who claim to be in the know about a system really know crap about it.
A little research goes a long way but that would mean reading a history kinda boring huh.

The gracies were taught JUDO from a JUDO great their system is modified JUDO and real jujutsu contains a lot of dangerous techniques that KANO the founder of JUDO took out to make it safe for SPORT.

Answer 6

Brazilian jiujitsu is way more bad ***

Answer 7

Brazilian Jiu Jitsu is one school of Jujitsu, as is each other form of Jujitsu. (Judo, Aikijujitsu and others)

Answer 8

bjj relies less on strength