The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Resolved: Judo is a better self defense method then Brazilian Jiu-jitsu

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open with Elo Restrictions Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/2/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 751 times Debate No: 74432
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




Resolved: Judo is a better self defense method then Brazilian Jiu-jitsu

Brazilian Jiu-jitsu: a martial art, combat sport, and a self defense system that focuses on grappling and especially ground fighting. Brazilian jiu-jitsu was formed from Kodokan Judo ground fighting (newaza) fundamentals that were taught by a number of individuals including Takeo Yano, Mitsuyo Maeda and Soshihiro Satake.
BJJ: An acronym of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu

Judo: a modern martial art, combat and Olympic sport created in Japan in 1882 by Jigoro Kano. Its most prominent feature is its competitive element, where the objective is to either throw or takedown an opponent to the ground, immobilize or otherwise subdue an opponent with a pin, or force an opponent to submit with a joint lock or a choke.

Self-Defense: a countermeasure that involves defending the well-being of oneself or of another from harm.

Better: Superior in majority of circumstances

- No lawyering,trolling or disrespectful remarks
- Burden of Proof is shared(as in the Con must prove that BJJ is superior to Judo)
-No direct plagiarism(copying and pasting without sourcing or acknowledging it isn't your work)
-Structure must be adhered too.

Structure(very important):
Round 1: Pro explains Rules and Definitions, Con 1st argument
Round 2: Pro's 1st Argument, Con Rebuttes
Round 3: Pro rebuttes, Con Closing Remarks
Round 4: Pro Closing Remarks, Con does not make any more arguments.

Thank you and let's get started!


The question presented is which martial art is more effective in self-defense, Judo or BJ-J

My first argument, as to adhere to Pro's outline:

While it may be true that one martial art has an advantage over the other, there is no rubric we possess that is accurate in every situation. to say one is better than another implies that in every situation, one is better than the other. An example

A man trains in BJJ all his life, and hasn't done Judo once. He gets in a fight and uses BJJ to defend himself. Would he have better chances by using the "superior" defense method? by no means! There are simply to many variables to determine any one self defense the "best", as self defense may be needed in a large scale of situations, all varying greatly.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting for this debate!

I am sorry for my late response! Now onto my opening arguments. With this, I would to refer to the debate structure for my opponent and the judges that this round I only need post my case and not refute my opponents yet. I will do that next round per the structure of the debate.

Judo is a great martial art invented by Jigaro Kano, it came from three different styles of Jujutsu(not Jiu jitsu) that were used for combat on the battlefield. Kano believed that some technique in Jujutsu were too dangerous and risky to perform and practice and therefore impractical to teach because you could never practice using them.

Kano refined what he believed were the most effective techniques and placed them into what he believed were the most effective. This consisted of Ne-Waza(ground techniques), Tachi-Waza(throwing techniques), and Atemi-Waza(striking techniques). Now this is the first point I want to cover against Brazilian Jiu jitsu(henceforth called BJJ) is that, while there are many styles of Jiu jitsu all of them focus on Ne-waza and not atemi-waza or atemi-waza. The theory behind BJJ is that most fights end up on the ground so you might as well be best on the ground.

BJJ does train takedowns sure, but it does not train throws anywhere near as much as Judo does. While, many if not all Judo dojos train both to equal effectiveness therefore making a well rounded fighter. And while the shiaii rules favor throws to submissions, the fact is that Judoka get trained in both pretty equally(take Karo Parisyan and Ronda Rousey as examples).

Judo is a great martial art and part of that comes from the fact that Kodokan Judo is the most practiced Judo in the world and there are virtually zero differentiations around. Kosen Judo is the only form of similar competition and it doesn't have nearly the following.

On the other hand, Brazilian Jiu jitsu has virtually a million different forms from Gracie Jiu jitsu, Guerrilla Jiu jitsu, 10th Planet Jiu jitsu, etc. Brazilian Jiu jitsu simply hasn't stabilized into what are the most effective techniques while Judo in all most all ways has.

Ne-Waza versus Tachi-Waza
Now the primary difference is between Judo and BJJ is that BJJ focuses primarily on the ground game while Judo encourages both. Now let's Judo does favor the standing game, even then Judo should be learned over BJJ. According to the Marine Corps Manual on hand to hand combat:
" Marines should avoid being on the ground during a close combat situation because the battlefield may be covered with debris and there is an increased risk of injury. However, many close combat situations involve fighting on the ground. The priority in a ground fight is for Marines to get back on their feet as quickly as possible."
Because of this the shiaii of Judo is greatly favored over the long prolonged ground fights that plague Brazilian Jiu jitsu.
Before a Judoka learns how to throw, he must learn how to fall and this is an invaluable skill for self-defense situations as well as daily life. While some Jiu jitsu schools do teach some falling techniques, most do not as it is not primary place most BJJ practitioners want to be. If we are going to fall it is best to learn how to do it correctly and often. If a BJJ practitioner were to fall toward the ground in a self defense situation, they may very well break their neck, while the Judo practitioner will be much more safe.
Safety attacks for the Street
Another major advantage Judo has is that nearly all the attacks can be applied directly on the street. Almost all throws start from standing and don't risk injury by attempting them, while for many BJJ attacks(particularly flying armbars, pulling guard, flying guillotines, etc) are simply too dangerous to use in a self-defense situation

I apologize that his isn't as long as I would have liked it, I merely procrastinated. Nonetheless, I believe it is clear that Judo is vastly superior to BJJ in a self-defense situation.


It sounds like you're saying Judo is better in situations where Judo would be more effective than BJJ, which is accurate. So is anything. Are we assuming every situation will be the same, and Judo (Out of these two methods) will always be superior? There is no such thing as a perfect defense, which means that there will always be a situation where Judo will not be your best choice, no matter which one is better in terms of power or usability.
Debate Round No. 2


I would like to point out my opponent has rebutted any of my points whatsoever. He merely made some sort of blanket statement regarding Judo being more effective in some situations but he never upholds his own burden of proof. Nor does he address the greater versatility, safe attacks, ukemi, the comparisons between ne-waza and tachi-waza or the standardization of Judo.

Therefore I must consider these points completely dropped.

Now I will go on to address his opening argument.

My opponent tells us a story about if a man trains BJJ his whole life then it would be better to use BJJ even though Judo is the superior self-defense method. Not only is this cherry picking it grossly misses the point of the resolution. My opponent doesn't understand that we are comparing styles in terms of the superior art for self-defense. Not only is that as broad as it gets, but its also as narrow as it gets, meaning that my opponent cannot use an argument from analogy here.

My opponent tries to put the cart before the horse by arguing that while one art may have an advantage over another that doesn't preclude that one is better for every situation. This is true, but I never argued that Judo had an advantage in a fight versus BJJ only that it would superior for using on the street to BJJ.

My opponent also makes the rather amusing argument that there is no perfect defense. I would like to point out it has zero relevance to this case because arguing on the comparison basis and Judo needn't be a master art to win the debate here today. It just needs to be superior overall to BJJ which I have demonstrated it is.


Hiskid forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


I extend my argument.


Hiskid forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by LaniusMarius 1 year ago
Use the rich text style or you can use Microsoft Word and copy and paste into your argument.
Posted by Shrek_sDrecKid 1 year ago
Can you teach me how to manipulate the font of the text?
Posted by Shrek_sDrecKid 1 year ago
Can you teach me how to manipulate the font of the text?
Posted by Shrek_sDrecKid 1 year ago
Are you kidding me? Oh well, I'll still debate. Go easy on me, haven't been on this site for like 2 months.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Kreakin 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Ff