Marking territory Mostly it is the ju jutsu ka who are marking territory. Judoka I have met generally have a more balanced view of things, but ju jutsu people often have a view that ju jutsu is better than sliced bread. And they'll often drag up the old argument that "well, judo was created from ju jutsu, but without the fun stuff" and that it somehow makes ju jutsu superior, which is bull. Like I said: Judo was a development and took a slightly different path than ju jutsu, but both paths are "correct" and will often lead to the same things. But not nessecarily at the same time. Judo is not better than ju jutsu, nor is ju jutsu better than judo. Is judo better than ju jutsu at pure grappeling, yes, I believe so. Is ju jutsu better than judo at teaching a self defence "way of thinking", yes, I believe so. The list could go on. Perhaps the examples I used gave the impression that I thought ju jutsu was better than judo. I hope it is clear now that that isis not a valid statement. It's like saying that blue is better than green. I might prefer blue, but I don't bash people who like green. I don't go around saying that green sucks because without blue there would be no green. Blue might be better suited for some tasks and green for others. The bottom line is that the two arts have different goals and will behave differently at different times. Comparing ju jutsu to anything is also difficult in its own since there are literaly thousands of styles and systems out there, no two alike, all empasising different things. Brazillian Ju Jutsu sweeped the floor in NHB fights when they came on but that was mostly because no one quite knew how to defend against that. Now we see that the more all round fighters are winning. My rant was about people claiming that their art is the best, period. That is something I have grown quite tired of, both as a martial artist but also as a part of the local budo federation trying to arrange seminars that had several martial arts. oh! Thank you for the welcome.