Before the trolls arrive

JudoStu wrote:As I understand it, in BJJ one can be a blue belt for a couple of years. Therefore a newly promoted blue belt should be sufficiently less skilled than a blue belt who is close to gaining their purple.

This is true but for all grades really. Only in the blue belt the difference between a newly promoted fellow and an experienced one is the biggest because at this point in the development you start to glue together techniques and develop your own game.

sodo lite wrote:While we are waiting for a comptent bjj (only) instructor to chip in I have another question for the cross trainers.

One of the things that was claimed that bjj got right and has been a big problem for judo is the standard(isation) of rank,
I am not talking about bjj blue = shodan or any other stupid speculation but are bjj ranks really standardised f.e. is a bjj blue belt in mexico roughly equivilent in skill to a blue belt in Alsaska or in France etc...,

My understanding is that the answer in 'no'. For example, I am aware of places that fairly routinely create blue belts in 8-12 months. I am also aware of places that take at last 3yrs AND competition wins (as in, first place) before awarding blue.

Somewhere in the middle, sanity lies.

this has always been a problem (sofar as you want it to be a problem) in judo, the quality of judo varies not only from country to country or association to association but from club to club and sometimes even within clubs. Have bjj solved this problem and if so how?

Again, AFAIK, the answer is no:

The original 'belt standards' were set by the first wave of competitors turned coaches... most of whom were retired comp. players. Meaning, they made you sweat blood to get that first step up the rung...and when you got there, you damn well know you'd earned it.

Since then, standards have shifted. Think about it logically....is it fair to demand that a person wait 2-3yrs before their first belt and win a competition or three? (Remember, blue belt is the *first* BJJ belt, excluding kids grades)

You asked about standards. What seems to be happening is that certain affiliated clubs / lineages have certain requirements - and these requirements differ. For example, a blue belt from Gracie Torrance denotes something very different (ie: basic awareness and competency) then a blue belt from somewhere like Hanger 4 / John Will etc.

Has the 'problem' been solved? In so much that the vast majority of BJJ belts are still a 12-18 month proposition...I don't know. Standards are still reasonably high, but there is always talk of how much better things were in the old days.

Myself, I think blue belt should signify basic level of competency, not competition winning uber-killer, but YMMV.

Dew wrote:
Creamy - just wanted to congratulate you on your choice of old Greg as your profile picture. The Boosh rules.

Heh. +1 to you.

For those not in the know



Old greg is probably *the* reason why I got so hopelessly addicted to Baileys.

I would say that there's good evidence that belts have not been standardized in BJJ. proof of that can be seen in a conversation held between 2 practitioners when they meet for the first time:

"what belt are you"
"_____"
"and what's your lineage?"

if rank was standardized that wouldn't come up as often as it seems to.

genetic judoka wrote:I would say that there's good evidence that belts have not been standardized in BJJ. proof of that can be seen in a conversation held between 2 practitioners when they meet for the first time:

"what belt are you"
"_____"
"and what's your lineage?"

if rank was standardized that wouldn't come up as often as it seems to.

I do often here this with BJJers, I’m a black belt under Rickson Gracie or I’m a brown belt under Mauricio Gomes. You don’t often here Judoka say I’m a black belt under Neil Adams. Why is lineage so important in BJJ? is it because some instructors have very high standards whereas others don’t? Or is it simply bragging rights that you were trained by Rickson as opposed to John Smith from Chipping Norton?

JudoStu wrote:

genetic judoka wrote:I would say that there's good evidence that belts have not been standardized in BJJ. proof of that can be seen in a conversation held between 2 practitioners when they meet for the first time:

"what belt are you"
"_____"
"and what's your lineage?"

if rank was standardized that wouldn't come up as often as it seems to.

I do often here this with BJJers, I’m a black belt under Rickson Gracie or I’m a brown belt under Mauricio Gomes. You don’t often here Judoka say I’m a black belt under Neil Adams. Why is lineage so important in BJJ? is it because some instructors have very high standards whereas others don’t? Or is it simply bragging rights that you were trained by Rickson as opposed to John Smith from Chipping Norton?

My understanding is that they apply the notion of quality control by stressing the lineage. By keeping track of who gave someone that specific color belt A they are able to track back who was responsible for diluting the skill pool of color A. This system of 'outing' lax standard belt givers keeps their belt givers 'honest'. It is easier to blame an individual for lax standards and ostracize him, not a federation as is the case in judo.

I don't think its either good or bad. Just a different understanding of how belts are to be conferred.

JudoStu wrote:

genetic judoka wrote:I would say that there's good evidence that belts have not been standardized in BJJ. proof of that can be seen in a conversation held between 2 practitioners when they meet for the first time:

"what belt are you"
"_____"
"and what's your lineage?"

if rank was standardized that wouldn't come up as often as it seems to.

I do often here this with BJJers, I’m a black belt under Rickson Gracie or I’m a brown belt under Mauricio Gomes. You don’t often here Judoka say I’m a black belt under Neil Adams. Why is lineage so important in BJJ? is it because some instructors have very high standards whereas others don’t? Or is it simply bragging rights that you were trained by Rickson as opposed to John Smith from Chipping Norton?

Its probably a bit of both. Like mentioned before different instructors have different standards. Some instructors are very competition minded whereas others more technique based. Lineage of your instructors and yourself says something about the quality of instruction. But being a blue or whatever belt under a world champion also of course gives you some bragging rights.

genetic judoka wrote:I would say that there's good evidence that belts have not been standardized in BJJ. proof of that can be seen in a conversation held between 2 practitioners when they meet for the first time:

"what belt are you"
"_____"
"and what's your lineage?"

if rank was standardized that wouldn't come up as often as it seems to.

JudoStu wrote:

genetic judoka wrote:I would say that there's good evidence that belts have not been standardized in BJJ. proof of that can be seen in a conversation held between 2 practitioners when they meet for the first time:

"what belt are you"
"_____"
"and what's your lineage?"

if rank was standardized that wouldn't come up as often as it seems to.

I do often here this with BJJers, I’m a black belt under Rickson Gracie or I’m a brown belt under Mauricio Gomes. You don’t often here Judoka say I’m a black belt under Neil Adams. Why is lineage so important in BJJ? is it because some instructors have very high standards whereas others don’t? Or is it simply bragging rights that you were trained by Rickson as opposed to John Smith from Chipping Norton?

nomoremondays wrote:

JudoStu wrote:

genetic judoka wrote:I would say that there's good evidence that belts have not been standardized in BJJ. proof of that can be seen in a conversation held between 2 practitioners when they meet for the first time:

"what belt are you"
"_____"
"and what's your lineage?"

if rank was standardized that wouldn't come up as often as it seems to.

I do often here this with BJJers, I’m a black belt under Rickson Gracie or I’m a brown belt under Mauricio Gomes. You don’t often here Judoka say I’m a black belt under Neil Adams. Why is lineage so important in BJJ? is it because some instructors have very high standards whereas others don’t? Or is it simply bragging rights that you were trained by Rickson as opposed to John Smith from Chipping Norton?

My understanding is that they apply the notion of quality control by stressing the lineage. By keeping track of who gave someone that specific color belt A they are able to track back who was responsible for diluting the skill pool of color A. This system of 'outing' lax standard belt givers keeps their belt givers 'honest'. It is easier to blame an individual for lax standards and ostracize him, not a federation as is the case in judo.

I don't think its either good or bad. Just a different understanding of how belts are to be conferred.

Lineage is also regularly used to out frauds in the BJJ community.

sodo wrote:Hi Creamy,

so you also agree that the majority of bjj instructors teach the sameway that judo ne waza should be taught.
So now the big question, why bs on jf that somehow bjj instruction was supposed to be more complex and superior to judo ne waza instruction. Admittidly this claim came from a few young trolls but it was repeated so often that it was beginning to be taken as gospel.

From what I understand from talking to knowledgeably bjj/judoka is that the training is basically the same just that in bjj you spend more time in ne waza, that there are a couple of techniques in bjj that are not (or no longer) part of judo and the rule differences/scoring mean that different strategies are followed making the two sports/art in regard to effectivity incomparable.
Is this correct? if so this is the definitive thread on the judo vs bjj argument and should be closed and stickied and a filter installed to close all other BJJ vs judo threads immediately

atb

sodo lite

I'm a bit late to the party. I think the key is "how judo ne waza SHOULD be taught". My experience is that a lot of Judo period isn't taught the way that Dutch Budo described. And that's a huge problem from what I've seen in the US at least.

I teach judo as described, to the best of my ability at least. Certain things need to be mastered or at least be competent before moving on to final applicaton.

It's a real pet peeve of mine, linked to the typical promotion system in judo, based on learning a bunch of techniques per belt. It's based more on quanitity than quality. Kind of like a lot of show but little substance.

We all know that you can tell someone who is truly a black belt in Judo without them having to do the whole gokyo no waza, right? It's based on their mastery/competency of fundamentals.

Rant over

Ben Reinhardt wrote:

I teach judo as described, to the best of my ability at least. Certain things need to be mastered or at least be competent before moving on to final applicaton.

It's a real pet peeve of mine, linked to the typical promotion system in judo, based on learning a bunch of techniques per belt. It's based more on quanitity than quality. Kind of like a lot of show but little substance.

That comes through when you see different clubs compete against each other, very obvious which clubs go for foundations and which clubs go numerical throws promotions.

Ricebale wrote:

Ben Reinhardt wrote:

I teach judo as described, to the best of my ability at least. Certain things need to be mastered or at least be competent before moving on to final applicaton.

It's a real pet peeve of mine, linked to the typical promotion system in judo, based on learning a bunch of techniques per belt. It's based more on quanitity than quality. Kind of like a lot of show but little substance.

That comes through when you see different clubs compete against each other, very obvious which clubs go for foundations and which clubs go numerical throws promotions.

Your observation/conclusion is often the result of clubs that are so intensely focused on competition (winning) that they have a limited repertoire. Like, knee-drop Seoi Otoshi (flop and drop) to turtle/repeat ad nauseum.

the way I see it, the requirement that one know x amount of throws before being promoted, is meant to be in addition to the judgement by the sensei of that student's abilities. it should be "does he move like a _____ belt?" yes. "in that case let's consider him for promotion. does he know x amount of throws?" no, he only know y amount. "ok, let's hold off on the promotion for now."

that is again my opinion on how it should be, which is not necessarily how it is.

We should also keep in mind that a BJJ Black belt takes longer to acheive than one in Judo or Ju Jutsu but I have been told by a Relson Gracie Black belt that it does not mean the same thing.

He and I have talked through a forum for about 11 years now and he keeps a training log that is like a journey through training in a Gracie Academy fro one of the brothers.

He has palyed Judo and done Ju Juts and other arts as well and he said to think of BJJ Black as a 3rd to 4th Dan, a PhD of Jiu-Jitsu whereas a Shodan in Judo or Ju Jutsu was like a High School deploma, the right to go to Ju College and the right to teach others.

We both started in 1997, me in Ju Jutsu and he at Reslon Gracie BJJ. We both have averaged about 3-5 classes and traiing sessions a week thrugh this time.

I got my Shodan in Sept.2002 and am a Yondan now, he got his black belt about a year ago so I would say his assesment was pretty good.

Tai-Jutsu wrote: We should also keep in mind that a BJJ Black belt takes longer to acheive than one in Judo or Ju Jutsu but I have been told by a Relson Gracie Black belt that it does not mean the same thing.

That is exactly what I did not want to keep in mind  

The point of this thread was to compare the teaching systems and not the grading systems. it is pointless comparing grades within judo itself, every club, region, country and continent has different standards and philosophies regarding grades, never mind comparing grades between different combat sports/arts.

What is interesting though is to question if BJJ really has found a way of really standardising the grades and if so how have they done it ?
and would that system be transferable top judo?

atb

sodo

sodo wrote:

Tai-Jutsu wrote: We should also keep in mind that a BJJ Black belt takes longer to acheive than one in Judo or Ju Jutsu but I have been told by a Relson Gracie Black belt that it does not mean the same thing.

That is exactly what I did not want to keep in mind  

The point of this thread was to compare the teaching systems and not the grading systems. it is pointless comparing grades within judo itself, every club, region, country and continent has different standards and philosophies regarding grades, never mind comparing grades between different combat sports/arts.

What is interesting though is to question if BJJ really has found a way of really standardising the grades and if so how have they done it ?
and would that system be transferable top judo?

atb

sodo  

From what I've seen and read, no, they have not. BJJ encompasses a lot of different teachers, organizations, etc. What I find is that BJJ teachers seem to have in general a much broader depth of knowledge and detail about what they teach than most judo black belts (meaning teachers/instructors/sensei). That being ne waza.

Part of the success is do the fact that they are teaching ne waza/katame waza, which lends itself much more readily to breaking down things into tiny detail and moving slowly from piece/part to piece part to put the whole thing together. Ne waza/katame waza can be done slowly that way and translate much easier to application than learning to do and apply nage waza.

The other part is that as noted, it takes longer to get to black belt (hence some sort of recognized teacher status) in BJJ. Even the lower ranked BJJ guys often teach reasonably well, because they mimic how they were taught...

For the record, My experiences in judo newaza and bjj ground grappling have been pretty similar in the dojo. They only really difer in shiai, and there the two are worlds apart. So I suppose newaza might differ in a very competition oriented school but not at a more traditional or kano-inspired one.
It's actually the same with throwing techniques in my bjj class. Because so many people just pull guard in competition many Bjj'ers don't get detailed instruction in throws.
The other day at bjj they taught, esentilly, a ko soto gari. Nobody but me could actually make it work because they didn't understand kuzushi.
They're not as different as people pretend, but they're also not identical.