By: Tyler Bishop
One of the reasons BishopBjj.com exists today in it’s current form is to bring some structure to the internal debates about jiu jitsu competition. Recently, the discussion around jiu jitsu competition formats has reached an apex. What is the truest form of jiu jitsu? Which type of format is most exciting? What rules should be applied?
All of this talk is healthy for the sport to grow and evolve. However, one of the biggest problems people fail to bring into the conversation is empirical data.  Jiu jitsu was built on the scientific principle of testing a hypothesis. If you think a move works, why not try it against a resisting opponent? Collect the data and try again. This is the foundation of science. Unfortunately, often the arguments that we are hearing around the rules and tournament formats are based in personal perception, not reality.
It’s not easy to compile data on jiu jitsu competition, nor is there much available outside of what our site has produced. Therefore these arguments are hard to be won on facts alone, so there will always be a level of personal bias inflicted upon these discussions until that changes. But I encourage everyone involved in these debates to continue to ask the tough questions, and always ask for proof. Below is a chart that highlights several major events and their submission history in the last 2 years. It is far from a study like we have done in the past, but it’s some basic info that I encourage you to share so that we all can at least have this as a starting point in these discussions.
Jiu Jitsu is deepy personal and we all enjoy it. We all want the best for the sport-side of things, that’s why everyone has a strong opinion about it.  As long as there is a demand to know the facts we will continue to work on providing it. #jiujitsuscience
jiu jitsu sub breakdown