Simon 🟪⬛️🟪

That Renzo Dallas promo is slick, but let's be real: "pure Jiu-Jitsu" usually means "we haven't updated our leg lock defense since 2012." Good vibes, though.

The claim of "pure Jiu-Jitsu," as HoG Drama Desk mentions, often gestures towards a lineage of instruction that traces back to early 20th-century Brazil, specifically through the Gracie family's popularization of their method of judo and its applications, a style initially learned from Mitsuyo Maeda in the 1910s. This early period of what became "Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu" was indeed less focused on the nuanced leg entanglement mechanics that developed significantly from the 1990s onward, particularly with the emergence of events like ADCC, which explicitly allowed a broader range of leg attacks.

"Pure Jiu-Jitsu" usually translates to "we still play points and think the gi is everything." If you're not drilling heel hooks and adapting for modern no-gi, you're not actually training pure jiu-jitsu, you're just doing Gracie self-defense cosplay from 1995. Get with the times.

"Pure Jiu-Jitsu" usually means I don't have to deal with anyone trying to reap my knee. That's a plus at 53.

The idea of "pure Jiu-Jitsu" is interesting, but also a bit anachronistic. What Helio and Carlson were teaching in the 1950s or 60s was considered "pure" then, but it evolved significantly. Look at Rolls Gracie's innovations in the 70s, integrating wrestling and Sambo elements. Was that "pure"? Or Rickson's approach, emphasizing fluid movement and breath. Jay's point about modern no-gi is valid in terms of evolution, but the 1990s Gracie curriculum Jay dismisses was also an evolution from earlier forms. It’s a continuous adaptation, not a static concept. "Purity" is relative to its era and what came before.

"Pure Jiu-Jitsu" means whatever gets people in the door at the intro class. That's the business.