In an interview on the Jits and Giggles Podcast, Gabi Garcia weighed in on one of Brazilian jiu-jitsu’s burning debates: the pay gap between male and female competitors. With decades of experience at the top level and recent involvement in the Craig Jones Invitational (CJI), Garcia offered blunt views on why the imbalance exists and how change might come.
Her comments follow criticism after CJI 2, where more than $2.5 million in prize money was to be paid out. While men received $50,000 submission bonuses throughout the event, the four women competing in a single bracket received none—even as some of their matches were widely considered among the weekend’s best.
Garcia said the outcry over submission bonuses missed the bigger picture. She pointed to her own career as an example of how fairness was never guaranteed.
“All my life when I competed, I was bigger than the other girls, and people would boo me. Nobody ever said, ‘Hashtag equal for Gabi.’ No, no, no,”
she said.
For Garcia, the conversation can’t be separated from economics.
“Let’s be real — this sport is 99% men. They’re the ones buying most of the tickets,”
she added.
Garcia explained that jiu-jitsu’s roots shape its current pay structure.
“This sport started from one family where basically only men trained. Kyra Gracie was the only one from the family, and they supported her later. That’s just how it was.”
She recalled refusing to sign an equal-pay petition years ago because she felt the push didn’t reflect reality.
“One week later, there was a tournament in California paying $10,000 for women’s heavyweight and $10,000 for women’s light heavyweight. I showed up to support, but people only complained. We had only four women — just two matches. The men had way more. You can’t compare 20 men’s matches with just one women’s match.”
Still, Garcia acknowledged progress, highlighting the $100,000 women’s prize offered by CJI.
“Now we have 100k. Next year there’ll be more divisions, more opportunities. We started with 100k — that’s a lot, right?”
Garcia’s position rejects easy slogans in favor of what she sees as the hard math of the sport: men drive ticket sales, but women’s opportunities are slowly increasing. While many may disagree with her pragmatism, she’s been clear that progress will come in increments, not overnight.
Her perspective shows how female athletes at the highest level navigate the tension between advocating for equality and recognizing the current limitations of the sport’s structure.
