Judo vs greco roman?

Question

I do not mean which wins in a fight. what are the advantages that one has over the other in training in the way of selfdefence. in your oppinion which will give you the best edge vs an untrained fighter on the streets. Please do not insult either art or other answers

Answer 1

Both are good.  Greco Roman focuses on more regulated techniques for upper body take downs and higher level of fitness.  Judo focuses on mastery of techniques, throws, submissions, and chokes.

If I were to choose a body type to bring to the fight, I'd pick the wrestler's.

If I were to choose the know-how to take to the fight I'd pick the judoka's.

Both are sports in their own rights.  In self-defense you can do anything and you're not limited to the rules of the sports.  As tradition, but not requirement judo dojos teach more self-defense.  Likewise, Greco Roman gyms primarily just focus on mat time and not self defense.

Answer 2

judo comes from jiujitsu, and wrestling was part of Pankration what is now referred to as Pancrase.  

There's a reason so many successful MMA fighters come from a wrestling background -- as a means of bringing your opponent to the ground and controlling them -- it works.

Answer 3

Both can be very effective but depends on how they are trained.  IMO you can progress much faster in six months of wrestling than in six months of Judo.  That said I wrestled all four yeas in HS and one in JC and have still have had my butt handed to me by good Judo players.  Its all about how realistically the arts are trained.  More often that not HS wrestling programs are pretty accelerated so you learn very quick.

Answer 4

I'll opt for judo as it came from jiu-jitsu :)***

Answer 5

It depends on how you train

I believe most people, myself included, learn to wrestle specifically for competition, which means you're assuming you're on a mat (for shots, etc.), there's only one guy, he's unarmed, roughly the same size as you, and not trying to punch, kick, choke, or otherwise put a jointlock on you, or other cheap shot (groin grabs, etc.).  The upside of it is you get plenty of experience struggling with someone, which gives you a good feel what a real situation would be like

Although Judo was originally designed for self defense, and there are quite a few self defense techniques taught through the katas, many schools focus on the competition aspect, which can affect the "street value" of your skills (I've often seen competitors who end up on the mat roll onto their stomach tucking their chin down, waiting for the ref to stand them up, as their opponent stands over them; an example of smart competition strategy that would get you in real serious trouble in a fight)  Judo has the additional advantage of teaching chokes and arm bars, as well as how to deal with someone who tries ot use your clothes against you

It has the disadvantage of relying on the gi for many of the techniques

So either discipline has a lot of good lessons, you just may have to rely on your own assessment of techniques, by asking yourself, am I open to being punched? can he grab my groin or poke me in the eyes?  what if we were on cement?  what if he was a lot bigger than me?

The important thing is that it's a healthy training environment so you can learn and progress

Of course, I know a lot of people that train both (like me) so there's no law against trying out both

Answer 6

Well they would both have similar benefits for self defense.  You could disable someone by driving them into the ground.  Judo has more submissions and holds so it would be better for that.  In terms of developing strength I'm sure Greco wins.  Both of those would be good self defense systems not complete systems but useful systems.