Defense and attack techniques and street effectiveness

NickR wrote:
How important are both defensive techniques (blocks, parry, throws, arm locks, ground grappling) and attack techniques - strikes - kicks, punches, elbows, head butts etc to a street effective self-protection martial art ?

Average Dude wrote:

NickR wrote:
How important are both defensive techniques (blocks, parry, throws, arm locks, ground grappling) and attack techniques - strikes - kicks, punches, elbows, head butts etc to a street effective self-protection martial art ?

Short question: why do you consider throws as defensive techniques?
I see no problem in using throws offensively, especially after softening up the guy.

NickR wrote:
Good point, this exactly the sort of comment I was looking for

Alan beckett wrote:This thing about most fights go to the ground, if you let them Just think how many fights have you seen that would never have got to the floor if only one of the fighters could throw a decent punch.

Also how many fights go to the floor because both parties have clashed and fallen over in the struggle NOT because one party was a grappler.

However, I also believe that if I am in range to hit someone or throw them then they are in range to return the favour, at which point all of the measures mentioned above become relevant.

I have to say as a disclaimer, that I am a beginner at Japanese Ju Jitsu, having only been training in it for a year and a bit. Saying that, I've been training in Thai Arts for um, quite a long while now and have 'been around' Martial Arts for along time, on and off. At present I am not training at an Aiuchi club (Can't get there on the designated days at present) and I am looking around at other Japanese Ju Jitsu clubs, as I wish to continue learning.

The Aiuchi and TJF way of practice is very technically thorough and I feel that Japanese Ju Jitsu in general is an excellent system of practice and the techniques can be mostly integrated and used by an experienced fighter, or at least someone who is used to a bit of 'roughousing' and/ or exposes themselves to more 'interactive' training methodology.

The problems that some Japanese Ju Jitsu systems have (not all), is the way they are taught and trained.

Firstly, there is very little meaningful resistance after a technique has been delivered, Ie You attack I defend and wait there whilst I throw you. It's true that after you've been practising a while you can pull-off alot of Ju Jitsu techniques quickly, so that the delay between delivery and execution is less so, but still, a system where the majority of its training consists of attacks and responses in isolation from meaningful continuation and follow-ups is by and large flawed in it's Training Methods (not the system itself).

And whilst certainly higher grades within these systems are very technically impressive and excellent at Ju Jitsu, the question remains, can they fight???

Without meaningful Resistance, techniques become 'ideals', in that in practice you get used to performing something slickly against pre-arranged attacks without the grunt-push-pull of anything approaching a 'Real Situation' (tm), this can be misleading. To me, you need to do both and more besides.

Secondly there isn't anywhere near enough emphasis placed upon Striking and Kicking, Hitting things with Strikes, avoiding strikes (as in 'sparring'). Striking is way down the list of importance within alot of Japanese Ju Jitsu systems, where often it is just assumed that people know how to punch etc.

Whilst that's an assumption you can make with a certain amount of confidence in regards to most Ju Jitsu strikes with the elbow (after all you know how to bend your arm right?), there is, obviously alot more to striking than making a fist, this is very rarely dealt with and represents a problem in that, what's the point in knowing alot of techniques, if your means of delivery is flawed? Even if you know how to punch?

If you are not used to belting things, then how are you going to react when you have to, for real?

Imagine being a boxer and only throwing punches at a stationary wall-pad and then trying to actually hit somebody without training for it, a real moving target. You find that mostly you can't because, you didn't learn to work against a moving target, you only work against stationary ones, you only work against stationary attacks, you only work in singular isolation, or knowing that the attack is a one two punch etc.

As a side note, there is way too much emphasis upon achieving Wrist Locks etc, often at the expense of just hammering someone (*See end point). This can lead to way too much emphasis upon finishing someone with finesse and making the syllabus fit the assault (You train as you Fight).

Whilst Locks, throws etc are all excellent techniques in themself, they should just be something that occur as a 'window of opportunity' and not something to go fishing for. I feel that with the over-emphasis upon Locking and Throwing in alot of Ju Jitsu syllabuses, some people practising are encouraging themselves to go looking for said techniques and not see the easier option that a strike or kick may well represent.

And as strikes etc in Ju Jitsu are often called 'weakeners' (the term negates them being taken seriously) alot of the time people forget about them all together and become fixated upon 'wrist spaghetti'. Ju Jitsu needs to get back to being a system of equal emphasis.

Thirdly, Ju Jitsu is a taught as a 'by-rote' system. In that generally for every attack, there is X amount of defensive techniques. This is excellent in terms of having a large syllabus to draw upon as a bonafide Martial Art, but represents a weakness in terms of all the techniques you end up carrying around in order to defend yourself.

To clarify, this is often the difference between Self-Defence and Martial Arts. For self-defence you need less techniques and more attitude, drive, speed, power etc. You don't need thirty defences against a wrist grab, when one or two will do.

For alot of Martial Arts you need to have alot of techniques because these build into all the possible variables of technical configurations of the system that you are learning and that is part of the fun, enjoyment and social practice of a Martial System. And that is the really great cool thing about doing Martial Arts, in that 'wow I know all these techniques'.

*In closing, I say, that the first major strength of Japanese Ju Jitsu, is that it has many excellent pragmatic answers to Habitual Acts of Violence (HAOV), particularly against grabs, holds, pushes, strangles etc.

Whilst I have outlined what I feel are flaws within the majority of Ju Jitsu training methods, I do feel that with exposure to and adoption of other ways of practising and training, Japanese Ju Jitsu represents a wonderful art based on sound practical principles for defence of ones person.

This to me, is an issue more to do with 'How you Train' and not 'What you Train in'. As someone with a background in Boxing, Muay Thai etc I can automatically bolt-on alot of JJJ type techniques and make them work in real situations (and have done), but that is only because I am used to working techniques against resistance in 'Live' training, i'm not so confident that some of my fellow Ju Jitsukas could say the same.