When did jujutsu become ineffective?

Question

I understand there's various styles of it (And I know BJJ is derived from Kodokan Judo), but only until recently have I heard people claming it's suddenly ineffective. Where the hell are these people getting their facts from? LOL? :p

I'm talking unarmed combat, as in notions from people that take martial arts.

Answer 1

If they were getting "facts", they would not be saying that it is ineffective.

It is like those who say kata is ineffective and useless.

They just don't know.

They studied under someone who has no real martial education.

From what I have seen in Jujutsu, I conclude that BJJ is incomplete.

All the things taught in BJJ are taught in Jujutsu, PLUS many others!

But you know what? I decided to let them remain in their ignorance. Because that is all it is concerning Kata, Qi and other misunderstood words.

They say ignorance is bliss... I beg to differ.

Answer 2

When did martial arts become ineffective to a gun? When did a gun become ineffective to the nuclear bomb? When did a nuclear bomb become ineffective to the sun expanding and enveloping us all?

What exactly is Jujitsu ineffective against and if its so ineffective then why has it survived so many centuries? I'm not talking BJJ either, I'm talking real Japanese JuJitsu.

It's never the art, its the one using the art. Your fool if you think your a monster because you know know MMA or BJJ. Your only a monster if you can actually perform like one. Regardless of style.

People who claim any style is useless (other then maybe air humping, thats pretty useless of a style) is a backseat martial artist. Just tell them to go back to watching their UFC while sitting on their fat butt eating popcorn and drinking coca cola.

Honestly, some people I wonder if they have ever even taken martial arts in their life.

Answer 3

Jujutsu is good but BJJ is just a much more refined system, yes some of the techniques remain, but alot of the ways they are aplied, the reversals, and other techniques are different

Ofcource JuJitsu has allot more striking than BJJ but like BJJ most of the strikes are used to open a person for a takedown or a joint lock

I personaly think BJJ is more refined but people saying that JuJutsu is ineffective, well, they are not right

Answer 4

From people who haven't a clue what jiu-jitsu consists.

Jiu-Jitsu is a deadly and effective 'complete' fighting system and bears little resemblance to BJJ (basically just Judo) or the stuff done in UFC or MMA matches.

In Japan, modern forms of Jiu-Jitsu include an automatic pistol along with traditional weaponry of knives and all the familiar wrist locks, escapes, and other techniques associated with Jiu-Jitsu (and Aiki-Jitsu and Aikido, etc.).

There are several dozen styles of Jiu-jitsu which are designed for nasty street fights which the MMA people are not acquainted.

Since I've began my martial arts training (1968) Judo & Jiu-jitsu have satisfied all my self-defense needs.

Answer 5

As jujutsu was quite popular in countrys like GERMANY ENGLAND FRANCE ETC long before the GRACIES father was even born I doubt it had anything to do with the GRACIES secretly taking it to BRAZIL and none of them ever studied in JAPAN.

BJJ is JUDO with most of the stand up eliminated for SPORT.
The GRACIES self defense dvd is MOSTLY STAND UP TECHNIQUE even they realize a skilled fighter shouldn't go to the ground in a real fight unless he has to and if he is truly skilled very few people should be able to get him to the ground.

Again it's the western delusion that what they see in a sport arena is real fighting and the only effective way.It's good but to much is assumed by both partys and onlookers alike.

Answer 6

Actually, it could be experienced people saying that, as a way to neutraliza jujitsu has been found.

Gone are the days where a bjj practitioner could dominate everybody. A wrestler with submission defense, or a striker with a good sprawl can render jujitsu ineffective.

Nowadays you have to know both standing, and grappling in order to dominate (and be good at both).

Answer 7

Its a good question. he's no longer bowling as an offspinner. He would not pitch the ball outdoors off and permit it turn in to the splendid hander. he's bowling it on a center stump line devoid of any turn (wicket to wicket) and hoping that the batsman will attempt something rash and present him a wicket. India have a great form of tweakers - what they choose is a strike bowler and that they'd desire to ask Bhajji to flight the ball and do his component.

Answer 8

It is NOT ineffective. It is more effective in combination with other arts/styles such as boxing, Muay Thai, etc. By itself you don't really have any ranged attacks/striking so to be able to fight at any range or situation you need to cross train.

Answer 9

The invention of the gun,that halted a lot of martial arts.The gun was the reason the Samaria warrior met their demise.Jujitsu would have been extinct if not for the Gracie family moving the art secretly to Brazil,during the invasion of Admiral Perry during the Japanese over take of the Ryu Kyu islands.

Answer 10

I teach TKD and was unaware That jujitsu was ineffective.
I teach my students to be aware of it and understand it and try to avoid it. It is not that easy to avoid a good practitioner.