View Full Version : New member introduction interested in history and research of martial arts

Will Hunt
10th September 2018, 12:21
Hello, I am new to here and thought it worth joining up because of some interesting material here.

I came to martial arts late - my 30s - but due to house & job moves have been exposed to Tiger Kung Fu, Tai Chi, Karate, Judo, Jiu Jitsu, and now more recently Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.

I would say that traditional japanese jiu jitsu is my main thing as I am hold a dan grade in this discipline. I did achieve brown belt in karate. I am originally from the UK but have the freedom to travel around these days. As I am out of the UK my nearest style is BJJ - which I am enjoying very much as a newbie.

I said I was interested in research. I have a small insight into the origins of japanese martial arts styles but would like to know more. In one of the Jiu Jitsu research forums my style of JJ was referred to as 'dirty judo'. This prompted me to analyse our syllabus in detail. Suffice it to say I disagree since up to 1st Dan there are 280 main techniques with only 97 of these being throws. Notably each technique has usually more than one aspect. Hence my disagreement with the statement - and I am happy to debate.

Cady Goldfield
10th September 2018, 18:08
Thank you for your introduction, and welcome to E-Budo, Will.
Your opinion on your system of jujutsu as "dirty judo" might make an interesting discussion topic on our Jujutsu Forum. Perhaps you could provide some background on the system and its main characteristics, and why it has earned that sobriquet.. and whether that was justified.
Or, just enjoy reading the forums.

Will Hunt
10th September 2018, 22:45
Hi Cady and thanks for your welcome

I picked up the 'dirty judo' quote when I was reading about UK Jiu Jitsu in the 70s (it was also popular in Victorian times I understand from other reading) and the Liverpool group / Bob Clark & WJJ history. My style is Bob Clark's direct lineage and only one generation down.

I wonder if the subject has already been covered, and put to bed, in that discussion? - Although in principle what is any martial art designed for self-defence if it is not 'dirty'? ie Judo and BJJ are sports-based and have rules. "Self defence" is exactly that and thus, rather than have rules, it needs to be effective (training methods notwithstanding).

Certainly our JJ training has always emphasised effectiveness of the techniques to neutralise assailants. I was drawn to JJ because of the graduated responses available to attackers - again refuting dirtyness of techniques - compared to say, Karate, which was always taught to us as 'one strike certain death' (ie no graduated response to attackers)

My two pennies worth!


11th September 2018, 08:44
Of course, the label 'dirty judo' has likely been applied just to distinguish your judo-based goshinjutsu from genuine koryu jujutsu.

The label says nothing about the quality or efficacy of the technique or system, and is often used to refer to the myriad of modern 'jiu-jitsu' systems prevalent outside Japan, which were typically founded/taught by early western judo students, who retro-fitted striking or breaking techniques into their judo practice.

Will Hunt
11th September 2018, 09:18
Hi there and thanks for taking an interest in my post.

I am unclear about the complete lineage that Bob Clark was accessing in developing the syllabus I learned; although I have read (& been informed when chatting to my instructors) that he had received tuition in varied martial arts (chinese and japanese) and brought these together. for the WJJF syllabus. (you may have already seen it - there are full videos of all the belt techniques on Youtube)

I have also read that two styles of Jiu Jitsu emerged in Japan - the more recent style emphasising locks, strikes, and hold-downs, as well as throws to deal with assailants in civilian clothes. This in contrast to the older style of battlefield techniques to deal unarmed with armour wearing soldiers. And naturally we are practicing the newer style ( we have included a couple of techniques that would work on someone in battle armour)

I have been exposed to some training at the Jitsu foundation (at UK universities) and this style was quite different to ours. It emphasised a softer receiving of blows than ours and used more numerous judo throws than in our syllabus.
Having also practiced some Judo (up to green belt) I would be more inclined to describe our system as a "full system" of blocks, strikes, kicks, locks, holds, and takedowns, with combinations of techniques, that includes throws - rather than being a system based around throws. In other words something much more than just dirty judo.

I hope that makes some sense....

14th September 2018, 04:17
Hi William - absolutely, I'm sorry I probably wasn't as clear as I should have been in my post.

The main point I was trying to make is that the label 'dirty judo' is something applied to any/all modern, western 'jiu-jitsu' systems, regardless of the character or curricula. This is because most all of these systems are a mash-up of judo, aikido and karate techniques.

See this thread for further clarification - http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?45810-Research-into-British-Jujitsu

I hope that clarifies!