That link is not entirely accurate given that jiu jitsu (or jujutsu to be correct) is an umbrella term for very distinct arts, some encompassing grappling, some wrestling, some striking and some weapons. Some training with aliveness, and others training strictly via katas... and some somewhere in between. Some are koryu, others are gendai budo.
There is no distinctive attribute to jujutsu other than being of Japanese origin. Technically Judo is a form of jujutsu (in fact, it was originally named Kano's Jujutsu.)
To the OP's specific question,what is the difference between Judo and BJJ (not jujutsu, but specifically Brazilian Jiu Jitsu), it can be generalized as follows:
Judo: a form of jacketed wrestling. The focus is on throwing an opponent (and in a S/D situation, knock him or kill him with a high impact throw.) If a high impact throw is not obtained, the attack is followed to the ground utilizing strength and explosiveness to pretty much mow the shit out of your opponent with a pin.
The pin can be used as a restraining mechanism, or to move to a submission or to land strikes (the later not being part of the sporting aspect of Judo.)
That is the theory of unarmed combat that drives Judo as a martial arts and as a sport. The rules that govern the sport of Judo are based on those premises.
Brazilian Jiu Jitsu (and Gracie Jiu Jitsu):
A combat system that relies on submission grappling, be it jacketed (with a gi) or without the gi. The focus is on efficient submissions and domination by what's called "position before submission." The innovative part of BJJ/GJJ is that it introduced a hierarchy of wrestling/grappling positions, each providing an effective base to land strikes or launch submission, and each providing a means to fight for a better, more effective position.
The original form of the art, now known as Gracie Jiu Jitsu, actively included throws from Judo as well as basic striking. The form now known as Brazilian Jiu Jitsu is the sporting aspect with a strict focus on submission grappling.
In either, there is no focus on extensive wrestling/clinch training as it is found in Judo, Greco or SAMBO. It is assumed that a basic takedown is sufficient and that a student will cross train with a wrestling art to improve his wrestling skills.
I've left a lot of details out, but we can say that, in summary, Judo focus on the clinch with the objective of incapacitating someone with a high impact throw whereas BJJ focus on the ground aspect of submissions. The focus of one is the add-on of the other (and vice versa).
There is no reason not to train both as they are complementary arts. For a strict self-defense, either will do fine - unless you are a smart-ass looking for a fight with a trained fighters, a bunch of dudes or people with weapons, either will give you enough tools to deal with the average punk.
For the point of view of completeness, I'd go for Judo. It provides an acceptable blend of submission skills, and will develop your ability to fight from the clinch. It trains you to be explosive, aggressive and brutal and it blend wells with striking arts.
The caveat is that, it's too brutal. No matter how careful you are, you will be thrown again and again and again. It hurts, it cracks your bones. It will be guaranteed that it will screw you up on the knees, back or neck at some point.
BJJ is safer (but not safe), and it will provide you with much superior ground skills than Judo. Lots of Judoka go to BJJ as they get older. It allows them to improve their grappling while saving their bones. It is no safe by any means, however, you still risk injuries.
It will be a matter of preference, whether you like to fight from the clinch or whether you like to fight for submissions. For the former, Judo. For the later, BJJ.
You could do both, which is really cool (though exhausting.)
|
