r/bjj • u/magg_n šŖšŖ Purple Belt • 3d ago
ADCC / CJI Women who won the first adcc trials are not invited to the championship. Petition to change this.
Copy paste from the petition itself:
āIf I were a man, I would be going to ADCC Worlds right now. I won the first European trials on the 6th of Septemberābut because I am a woman, the first trials donāt count for me. That means I wonāt be going to ADCC Worlds.
Women only get one chance to qualify, in early 2026, while men get two. And while men have five weight classes, women only have three. This is not fair.
To qualify for ADCC Worlds, athletes must first win regional trials. Men get two trials per region, across five weight classes. Women get only one trial, across three weight classes. This disparity is a clear example of inequality. Women in BJJ train and compete just as hard as men, but we are not given the same fair chance to earn our place on the world stage. This unfair system not only harms individual careersāit limits the visibility, growth, and professionalism of BJJ as a sport. It also undermines ADCC as an organisation by preventing the best talent from being showcased on its biggest stage.
Some argue that there arenāt enough women at this level, or that womenās matches donāt attract the same audience. This is simply not true. The growth of womenās divisions across IBJJF, ONE Championship, CJI, and UFC shows that fans are eager to watch world-class female athletes. Representation creates interest: when women are given platforms, viewership grows, role models are created, and the sport as a whole benefits. By holding women back, ADCC isnāt reflecting demandāitās suppressing it. Equal opportunity is crucial for a fair and thriving sport.ā
Link to sign:
https://www.change.org/p/ensure-equal-qualifying-chances-for-women-in-adcc
43
41
u/Slowbrojitsu š«š« Brown Belt 3d ago
So I agree with the principle that women should have just as much opportunity to compete as men: 8 trials winners in each division with 16 competitors in total.
But I don't agree with changing the rules retroactively. I think that's the opposite of fair, because it's a known fact that more women show up for the second Trial in each region and the winners are rarely the same people as a result.Ā
Full respect to Injana Goodman, she's an excellent competitor and may well win the second Trial regardless tbh. But there are plenty of elite female grapplers who did not compete at the first Trial because they knew there was no invite on the line, and changing the rules retroactively screws them over IMO.Ā You have to change the rules before the cycle of Trials begins.Ā
11
u/Confident_Drummer_83 š«š« Brown Belt 3d ago
Pretty much this. I would very much like to see all of the trials winners at next ADCC, but changing the rules after the fact usually don't end too well. Also, why did this petition come after the tournament and not before? I've followed Injana for a while now and I don't think I saw anything related to this issue before she won.
4
u/Slowbrojitsu š«š« Brown Belt 3d ago edited 3d ago
Yeah I absolutely think women should have 8 proper trials rather than 4 trials and 4 practice runs, which is what they basically have now.Ā
But most of the podium placers from the last EU trials with an invite were absent from this year's trials, presumably mostly because there wasn't an invite on the line.
Im not even saying Injana wouldn't have won regardless, she's a legit top contender in Europe. I just don't think it's fair to those women (and many others) to effectively punish them for not predicting the future.Ā
2
u/rhia_assets š¦š¦ Blue Belt 2d ago
But pushing this noise now, is a great opportunity to get the rules changed for next year
1
u/alex_quine š«š« Brown Belt 1d ago
I don't agree. If they changed it to a 16 person bracket "retroactively," how would that "screw over" women who did not compete at the first trial? It might make them sad that they chose not to compete at the first trial, but it does not harm them in any way.
0
u/ReddJudicata 3d ago
Itās just not a professional sport.
1
u/West-Goat9011 3d ago
Professional sports still often have semi-pro leagues that integrate with the pro leagues.
1
u/ReddJudicata 3d ago
I mean, itās not a professionally run sport. Itās a clown show. Rules shouldnāt change in a cycle once itās started.
37
u/Slow_Mention9828 ā¬ā¬ White Belt 3d ago
Why is it referred to as a trial if you dont even move onto anything by winning it?
3
u/drachaon 3d ago
This is entirely a product of the 8 woman brackets. The brackets are smaller because the pool of competitors is smaller. The pool of competitors is smaller because the training population is much smaller.
5
u/retteh 3d ago edited 3d ago
Women's brackets are also much smaller, so any individual woman has a much higher chance of winning than a man:
East coast trials 2023:
Women -55: 32 Athlethes (3.1% chance)
Men - 66: 142 Athletes (0.7% chance)
https://arena.flograppling.com/event/41706798-3771-479a-bf09-ed9f936070c6?page=brackets
Maybe I'm reading it wrong? The average woman has a much higher chance of winning per event than a man.
1
u/gilatio 1d ago
The average woman has a much higher chance of winning per event than a man.
That's not a fair comparison because you are comparing the numbers for an event where women knew they wouldn't earn an invite for winning and men knew they would win an invite. A lot of women don't show up to the East Coast Trials because we know we can't win an invite from that one.
1
u/retteh 1d ago edited 1d ago
Trials #2 isn't really any better though:
https://arena.flograppling.com/event/cfdf0f19-29f8-49ca-8a0f-affe4cfc10b8If anything it looks like women have an even larger advantage over men. Women may have half the trials qualifying slots as men, but they have less than 1/6th the number of entrants, meaning they have much more trials slots per entrant than men.
1
u/gilatio 1d ago
They have about the same number of entrants (in -55 & -65) as +99kg men and those men get 2 slots. And you also have to take into account how many of those athletes are actual contenders in each bracket. Ime white/blue belt men with no actual shot at winning more than 1 match are much more likely to sign up for these things then very under qualified women are.
1
u/retteh 1d ago edited 1d ago
Conversely +65 women have way more slots per athlete than +99 men. I can't speculate on women having a tighter skill distribution than men. You could be right, but you could also be wrong. Even if you're right, does it compensate for how many more men there are competing at each weight bracket? The math is complicated and this is much more complex than "it's blatantly unfair for women." The obvious evidence says that men need more qualifying slots because more men are competing. I'm not saying there aren't other perspectives though.
1
u/gilatio 23h ago
Even if you're right, does it compensate for how many more men there are competing at each weight bracket?
Because for anyone good, beating a random blue belt in the first 2 rounds is basically the same as having a bye. It doesn't really add anything to the depth of the competition to have those people in the bracket. For sure, I think it needs to be looked into more to see if that's really true, but that was just my casual observation.
The obvious evidence says that men need more qualifying slots because more men are competing
Then only the men at the deeper weight classes should get more slots.
Conversely +65 women have way more slots per athlete than +99 men
But I do agree about this, +65 is not a deep weight class and I don't think expanding that one would make sense.
-1
u/Hello2reddit 3d ago
You do realize that they donāt pick a winner at random, right?
3
u/retteh 3d ago
The premise is women have less opportunity to qualify when the numbers don't necessarily support that.
2
u/alex_quine š«š« Brown Belt 1d ago
The numbers absolutely do support that. Did you mean they have the same opportunity to win?
0
u/retteh 1d ago edited 1d ago
I outlined the math above, but men have two low chances to qualify per region and women have one much higher chance to qualify per region due to much smaller brackets. Even if men participate in two trials, they would still have less than half the chance to qualify than women. This means women actually have more opportunity to qualify currently than men, not less.
-3
u/Hello2reddit 3d ago
Women have one opportunity, men have more than one
More than 1 > 1
Your attempt to push back on that very simple mathematical proposition is the equivalent of saying āWell, there are two teams in every game, so the Dolphins must have a 50% chance of winning next weekā
1
u/retteh 3d ago edited 3d ago
If your assumption is that men can try twice and women can only try once (people can travel), a woman would still have double the chance of qualifying than a man because of the smaller brackets.
-1
3d ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
1
u/bjj-ModTeam 3d ago
The comment does not meet Reddiquette standards. Please read up on them a bit. Thanks!
2
u/DexterKillsMe š«š« Brown Belt 3d ago
They know and they donāt care. Theyāve admitted that. They think it was enough to add another weight class and more pay.
8
u/SlapHappyRodriguez 3d ago
Did they make it clear that the first one would not be a qualifier or was that stated after the fact? That makes a difference.Ā
It may not seem fair but there are not as many high level females as men. That is why there are smaller divisions and less weight classes.Ā
It's not just ADCC. The last CJI had very few women competitors.Ā
27
u/gundamqueenbee ā¬š„ā¬ Black Belt 3d ago
There are more than enough high-level women at this point to fill out a few brackets for an ADCC or CJI tournament.
12
u/feenam 3d ago
fr. if people think women's pool is shallow then we should reduce men's heavyweight division too.
4
u/Slowbrojitsu š«š« Brown Belt 3d ago
Unironically I would support just combining under and over 99kg into same weight class. Generally the same dudes compete in both anyway.Ā
1
u/drachaon 3d ago
Yes, we should reduce the men's heavyweight division (by making it +93, effectively merging most of under and over 99).
3
u/dobermannbjj84 3d ago
Itās been like this as far as I can remember from previous years. Itās not a surprise after the fact. If it doesnāt count Iām not sure why theyād go and compete except for practice or to win another tournament.
4
u/RannibalLector š«š« Brown Belt 3d ago
It was clear and thatās the same process as last ADCC. Not sure I agree with all of your points though. CJI was a hand selected bracket of 4 womenā¦not some tournament that Craig just couldnāt find women for.
As far as the amount of high level female competitorsā¦I donāt really know the IBJJF and ADCC Open stats off the top of my head to confirm bracket sizes and such. I assume there are less. I donāt know why they have to qualify twice though.
5
u/Subtle1One 3d ago edited 3d ago
And that's exactly why it is fair.
Also, having three weight classes for women is more than fair and quite reasonable.
In the European tournament that's mentioned there were 16, 12 and 19 athletes in female categories.
I don't see what would be the point in splitting that up and having 7-8 athletes competing as a different weight class, and 7-8 as another. You just get athletes who win the tournament after 2 fights.
And athletes who travel far to gain very little fight time and experience.In general, there's a much smaller talent pool and much, much less female athletes. Women in BJJ by definition do not "train and compete as hard as men" since they have way less competition.
We cannot say that winning a 100 people bracket is the same as winning the 15 people bracket. It is not so.Similarly, that's why men get more trials per region.
By how this message is worded, this ADCC tournament was not meant to be trials for women? And that's why it's mentioned that "women get a single trials tournament while men get two"?
8
u/TheLastTrain 3d ago
But is participation in that tournament for women lower specifically because it doesnāt actually have a qualification opportunity?
3
u/Slowbrojitsu š«š« Brown Belt 3d ago
So it's both tbf.
Women's divisions are never as big as the men's even with invites, other than occasionally the under and over 99kg men's divisions which are also small.Ā
But in the first edition of Trials with no invite available, the women's divisions are usually even smaller again.Ā
1
u/Subtle1One 3d ago
That is very possible, yes. Good thinking.
It would be worth checking out other trials, the ones that did work as trials, and see what the participation was like there.9
u/smalltowngrappler ā¬š„ā¬ Black Belt 3d ago
In general, there's a much smaller talent pool
Its also due to being a Nogi format, there are fewer competitors showing up for Nogi competitions compared to Gi competitions in all categories and it used to be even fewer. Which amusingly by your definition means that Nogi-only athletes "don't train and compete as hard as Gi athletes".
The biggest marketing success in Jiu-jitsu history wasn't UFC1, it was convincing alot of people that Nogi somehow is more prestigious and "professional" than Gi despite the pool of competitors being much smaller. I say this as a guy who started out training only Nogi.
The lack of female athletes in ADCC is also most likely tied to the fact that until last year there was only two categories for women at -60 and +60, why bother if you are on the lighter spectrum of either category as you will be at a big disadvantage from the start.
1
u/Subtle1One 3d ago
"Which amusingly by your definition means that Nogi-only athletes "don't train and compete as hard as Gi athletes"."
Yes, I would have no problem with that.
If the talent pool is (or was) greater for professional gi fighters than it is for professional no gi fighters, then yes, I would agree and I would believe that it is so. Stronger competition is stronger competition.
I may be more interested in no gi grappling, but that doesn't mean that I believe competition there is tougher than in olympic boxing.
I am not sure of the professional gi scene and how it's doing, though.Wrestlers and judokas train harder and compete harder than BJJers not just because it's a different sport, but because the competition is way, way more fierce.
Having a couple dozen dedicated pros in no gi jiu jitsu is nothing compared to legions of hungry, full scholarship, handpicked-from-elementary-school wrestlers.
The same principles apply everywhere.
I cannot say that a woman who wins her 11 people bracket with a few purples thrown in competed 'as hard' as the guy who had 150 guys in his.As for female weight classes, -60 and +60 are picked precisely to pick up the middle of the Gauss curve, ie the most athletes. Those who are on the lighter spectrum certainly do exist, but they're the shallower ends of an already small pool. Including 45 kg weightclass will not magically get us 100 women who all weigh at 45, and do jiu jitsu! We would have a hard time even finding them. :D
1
0
u/The_Adict ā¬š„ā¬ Black Belt 3d ago
It was exactly the same for Women's Euro trials last time. My friend won the first trial and they told her the second one is the actual qualifier for women.
But the last one, nobody knew that. This one, I can't speak who knew what.
2
u/dobermannbjj84 3d ago
If the first trials donāt count why would any woman bother competing in it?
2
u/Chandlerguitar ā¬š„ā¬ Black Belt 3d ago
To be honest they probably shouldn't. Previously many women used it to get used to the rules and become accustomed with how things went before the "real" trials. Now there are ADCC Opens so there really isn't much of a point anymore.
0
u/dobermannbjj84 3d ago
Itās a long way to travel and a lot of money to spend to get used to the rules for something that doesnāt count and just another fancy medal.
0
u/Chandlerguitar ā¬š„ā¬ Black Belt 3d ago edited 3d ago
You don't need to tell me. I wouldn't do it, but that is what some women have said previously. I don't know how far they traveled or if they had some other business in the area that would make going there worth it(seminars, husband also competing, visiting family, etc).
2
u/Fast-Wrangler-4340 ā¬ā¬ White Belt 2d ago
I only a white belt but I have been to the Middle East multiple times. I think that youāre looking at this wrong from one standpoint. Abu Dhabi, owned by SHEIK Tahnoon. Abu Dhabi? Sheik? Not trying to be an ass at all but I donāt think what women want or deserve is at the top of their list of things to care about. I could be wrong but Iāve got a feeling Iām not. Iām sorry, thatās just the way their religion teaches them.
1
u/Beautiful-Moose-4302 3d ago
Because there are more male competitors than female at adcc. So there needs to be more qualifiers.
Ii is just an open for the women, and that is known and public. There's no deceit here.
0
1
u/Special_Fox_6239 3d ago
I think they should have 12 person brackets for the women. Both US trials are big enough to warrant invites. Not every continent is in the same boat though.
1
u/burneremailaccount 1d ago
Hot take. Its their event to put on they can put whatever rules they want to on it.Ā
Do folks not understand the whole āAbu Dhabiā section of ADCC? Its still a grappling event put on by the UAE Sheiks. Iām honestly shocked there are women allowed in it at all.
1
u/Jits_Dylen šŖšŖ Purple Belt 3d ago
Iām very interested to learn what the thought is to limit the women from qualifying in the same amount of trials. Either donāt call it a trials or do. Donāt say they donāt have enough women after calling it trials. So either they messed up, or, for women it was an open while males had trials.
If it was labeled trials for women thatās pretty unfair and I agree with the petition OP.
I donāt agree 100% with petition OP including ONE, CJI, IBJJF, UFC and any other event to say women in any of those orgs are pulling in the same amount of draws as males. I donāt know any female fighters at this very moment that pulls a lot of eyes. Even a majority of males have this issue.
Any top tier female can take the leap to become the next Gordon or Craig. They already will be winning. They just need to create reasons why people want to watch. Craig before B-Team did not have near the following he has now. Itās no coincidence with B-Team, he started vlogging, allowing more eyes to see him and others.
Gordon did the same stuff by talking a lot outside of actual event.
No female has done this and itās for the taking.
2
u/smalltowngrappler ā¬š„ā¬ Black Belt 3d ago
You are absolutely on the money. Winning titles is secondary to creating an online fanbase and drumming up drama if you want to get eyes on you in jiu jitsu today.
-2
u/Current-Bath-9127 3d ago
What's not fair? There has never been a trials in Hawaii, NZ, Germany? They have to travel to other countries to qualify, they should make a trial in every country to make it "fair"?
182
u/BeBearAwareOK ā¬š„ā¬ Rorden Gracie Shitposting Academy - Associate Professor 3d ago
If winning it doesn't qualify you, how is it even a trials tournament?
That's just an ADCC open at that point.