Monty Collier wrote:
Dear Michael Neal,
Modern Olympic Judo is defined by a body of rules. Coaches and participants select techniques and tactics from an enormous matrix of wrestling moves that they think will help them win in competition. Modern Olympic Judo is jacketed wrestling, it is not combat.
It is just as much a combat art than any other, in fact even basic high school wrestling is a very effective way to defend yourself. Grappling is a very effective way to defend yourself, especially grappling techniques that are strengthened through competition and randori.
All of wrestling can be used in unarmed combat, but not all of unarmed combat can be used in wrestling.
Therefore, if you are only trained in wrestling, then you will not be fully prepared to deal with all that takes place in combat. You will not be trained to avoid and deal with strikes. There are no strikes allowed in the competitions of Judo, Folk-style, Free-style, or Greco-Roman wrestling
When Greco-Roman Gold Medalist Rulon Gardner demolished Olympic Judo Gold Medalist Hidehiko Yoshida in a recent pride event, Rulon did not only use his wrestling, but he also punched among other things. He had to learn about other parts of combat before he entered into pride, because Greco-Roman Wrestling is not combat ready. Yoshida also had to learn some boxing and Jiu-jitsu, among other things, because Olympic Judo is not combat ready. .
There is not a single martial art on the planet that would be combat ready by your defination then, only a mix of several different styles. I agree, mixed martial arts are much more effective than one art alone, there is no doubt about that. But that does not mean that Judo is not combat effective. To compete in MMA you have to be good at striking and grappling because the competition is trained that way. If you want to maintain Judo is not combat ready then you have to say that neither is Aikido, BJJ, Muay Thai, boxing, karate, jujitsu etc.
Regarding your claims that Judo does not train striking, much of that preserved in the kata. But regardless if you do kata training or not, once the Judoka closes the distance striking is pretty much useless anyway.
So, if you are training someone to participate in an Olympic style Judo competition, then you are training that person to deal with an opponent who will be using techniques that are compatible with the rules of Olympic style Judo. You are not teaching that person to identify and avoid sucker-punches. You are not teaching that person to close the distance and clinch when the adversary strikes at you. You are not teaching that person how to apply or escape from heel-hooks, knee-bars, hip-kimuras, omo-platas and so forth.
So, the techniques of Olympic Judo can be used in combat under specific conditions. But, you would only be partly ready for combat. You need to study more in order to be fully prepared, or combat ready.
Oh yeah, I would like to see a takedown tournament held in which world class competitors from Free-style, Greco-Roman, and Judo all competed against each other. Each specific match up would have to require the competitors to wrestle once with and once without the gi. This would be exciting. We need more takedown competitions.
What do you mean "You are not teaching that person to close the distance and clinch when the adversary strikes at you." This is the very essence of Judo and where it excels.
Again, there is not martial art that exists that excels at all of the combat conditions you have laid out here.
Since this is an Aikido forum I will pick specifically on it using your logic. Aikido does not train much grappling especially newaza, thefore it is not combat effective. Aikido does not really teach how to strike effectively, therefore it is not combat effective. Aikido does little randori or competition, thefore it is not combat effective. Aikido does not train very often against kicks, therfore it is not combat effective. etc. etc. etc.
So my question to you is, Judo is not combat ready as compared to what?