tallgeese

4/8 Drilled shoulder lock from high guard followed by armbar. Finished with a taking back maneuver from guard involving an arm wrap. 30 min hard free roll working with one of the fighters. Cool down by walking thru some De La Riva material.

4/5 Drilled De La Riva position. Moved to leg sweep. Then to roll over sweep and finished with lifting sweep. 40 min of free roll. Worked on keepinf connection in an extended spider and counters to such escapes. 3, 5 min rounds boxing. Spent most of the time working on being a living heavy bag after getting clipped hard right out of the gate. These things happen.

It's a matter of being smart about how you train. You might not be able to bang like you once did. And that's okay. More recovery time between those sessions, better nutrition, quicker to back off instead of pushing thru, ect. There's no real "prime: unless you're competitive. Then there is clearly some degeneration when we talk about high, elite levels of competition. If your goal is to defend yourself then you can be at your "prime" for quite a while. It's relative to your goals. However, the biggest adjustments that can keep you clearly progressing past 30, 35, and 40 (yes, I just broke 40) is being smarter about tactic selection and training patterns.

4/3 Drilled butterfly sweep and variant. 2 min rounds of sweeping from open guard, passing guard, butterfly guard. 2 min match from feet 30 min free roll. Broke down a couple of mistakes from the Pans and tried to find fixes for them. For those who know me from back in the day (MP, GS, and LP), I also got to watch Jim Theobald get promoted to brown belt tonight! Great time.

Thanks everyone! Wow, I'm not even certain that I had noticed! I appreciate that I'm able to contribute in a meaningful way and I truly enjoy the discussions we have here. Even when we disagree. This is hands down the best place on the internet to share in this passion we all have. Both from a standpoint of intelligent discussion and total sum of knowledge across domains. Thanks again everyone and I hope I can continue to contribute.

I've used a smattering of lots of stuff I've trained in over the years in the altercations that I've been part of due to my law enforcement career. I've utilized stand up aspects from my karate background. Mainly small joint manipulation. What has been highly useful is my jiu jitsu, however. It might not be actual truth that 90 percent of fights end up on the ground. But I can say that 100 percent of every real, work fight that I've been part of has ended up there. The ability to takedown, move to a dominant position, and control is incredibly useful.

Very nice! Congrats!

4/1 Drilled lifting sweep from open guard. Then arm bar from some sweep. 30 min free roll.

You've actually made the choice easier and dealt with the biggest issues. Look at your work schedule. That's the most solid thing you have to work around. Then, check with the clubs in your area and get their class schedule. Compare and see which clubs will even work based on your schedule. That sounds like it will narrow down your choices quite a bit. After you get that short list, go and look at each. Then just pick one that fits the best. Get a feel for the training atmosphere and the personalities (both as a whole and individuals), make sure you find one you think will fit well with and go that route. Better to find a club you like that nit pick styles. As a caveat, make sure that the style (more to the point the club) is working on the same goals that you have. If you're looking for a SD school and they do sport alone (or vice versa) then you won't be happy. Good luck and keep us posted.

Clearly, they were necessary to someone. The evidence is that they exist. Helio found that a locked closed guard was highly effective for his small frame. It was an easier method of launching this techniques. So on for Funakoshi Sensei and so on. Once we're talking about different methods of the same doctrine, we are discussing differences in strategy. TKD and Shotokan are both percussion arts. But the strategies each employ are different (often). This is what separates them from one another. A more obvious or understandable example would be the difference between Army Rangers and Army Delta Force. Both are Army. Both are ground style forces. But the way they employ their weapons and actions are very different. But, it was still Jujitsu and it was still Shuri-te. Changed, but still core. WARNING: BAD COMPARISON... A Taurus, a Lincoln, and a Crown Victoria are brands of the Ford Motor Company, but, imho, they're all still Fords, and in these, they're all still automobiles. Please be nice...I did say it was a bad comparison!! I think that might be an accurate comparison in some cases. There are plenty of stand up systems of similar decent that it applies to. However, that's not always the case. For instance, BJJ and JJJ are very different in philosophy, training modality, and tactics that they are indeed different "brands". There might be some similarity between BJJ and one of the turn of the century sub sets of Judo, but we're not even certain how much due to long remaining lineage. However, BJJ has evolved to the point that I really doubt that it currently resembles any part of that former sub art. FMA are knife heavy, and certain arts out of Japan also utilize the knife. Yes, both boil down to using the sharp part against the other guy but they are SO dissimilar in training method that one can't really argue that they are the same thing.

Agreed. Doctrine is the big defining difference. That said, there's enough movement differences to to be noticeable in many cases. As long as people learn differently and have different uses, a variety of systems to train and provide principles will be beneficial.

Possibly it's that the style has it all, but the practitioner doesn't "have it all"!! So, we seek out what "we" lack. That's an interesting idea. I can kinda see where you're coming from, but some of the stuff we talk about as part of a comprehensive combative program these days didn't even exsit as a part of original systems. The example I made before for instance: "Karate will not deal with the ground like BJJ. BJJ will not address the knife. FMA will get you more reps than perhaps any other system out there, but it won't teach you hand gunning. A good shooting school won't teach you to clinch (outside of some of Henk Iverson's and they are difficult to find in the non LE realm). " I truly don't think you'll find specialized training in each of these systems in any of the others.

The way to get effective tactics quickly is indeed to "own" a handful that apply across the board. That's great. The downside to this is that it stunts the growth of the rest of your art. So, again, we come back to what are you looking for. I've been on both sides of this. I will say, that my ground game EXPLODED when I decided to stop using the 4 things I was good at on the ground and made myself use new tactics. On the long term side, this gives you more options that can be used across more varied situations. Both are important. Drill a few hard until they are useful under stress. Make sure that they are ones that have the most use. Then, once those are down, set them aside in training and learn others. It's how we grow. And eventually, you'll want more tactics in your arsenal. I know, everyone starts reaction time and Hick's Law at this point. Even Siddel, who did so much work in the area, points out that training mitigates these factors. Training to unconscious competence has much more to do with success under stress than does the number of tactics one drills.

Welcome aboard! Looking forward to seeing your thoughts.

I had a super long response that I just managed to delete. So I'll keep this a bit shorter this time What is your definition of "work just fine on their own" out of curiosity? There are a lot of ways to look at the arts and each is valid. However, in my experience, once you learn something new it only become effective for SD once you interegrate it with what you do. No art will truly cover all combative circumstances. Karate will not deal with the ground like BJJ. BJJ will not address the knife. FMA will get you more reps than perhaps any other system out there, but it won't teach you hand gunning. A good shooting school won't teach you to clinch (outside of some of Henk Iverson's and they are difficult to find in the non LE realm). Now, to govern all this you need an over arching set of principles to make certain that you're putting them together as best as possible. But that's looking at the problem from a SD aspect. Others are valid as well. I'm just wondering how you're looking at the issue. That's all. We all run the gambit as well. Few of us are fully focused on just one aspect of martial out look. I spend most of my time thinking about SD. However, my BJJ tends to me more artsy and occasionally competitive in nature. For me, I started experimenting at brown belt level. I got to start taking a look at boxing then and it was great. It just continued from there. Obvoiusly, to start talking about things we discusses above a good base art is critical. However, there's some differences in time I think you can look at. Two close stand up systems would not only a) be redundant in a lot o cases, but also b) be potentially confusing from a pure art stand point. One might want to wait longer to start studying a second art. However, more different arts might cross train easier earlier. For instance, if you're in a karate art and begin studying BJJ it's much easier to keep separate due to the vast differences in the arts. One could start shooting any time while doing any art and easily "merge" the two. In fact, if one's interested start early. It's going to let you gain a commonality of practice in your fundamental fighting postures. Like I said, it's just a different outlook.

I agree, go out and explore. I don't really have a view on this from the kata side. Even in my pure karate days we were more of an up front application set of guys than kata. Even at that, no one system has it all. get a solid foundation then explore. After that comes the most important stage- integrate what you learn in to how you respond. It's not enough to just pick up some movements, figure out how to make them work fluidly with what your foundation is. That's where you really start to functionally step outside your base art.

I really think everyone who's really into jits should do it at least once. If you do end up going, let us know, I'm probably going to do it again at some point in the future.

The Bren Event Center at Irvine.

Pretty much everything I do these days is grappling. Most everyone uses a variant of the IBJJF rules: http://www.ibjjf.org/docs/rulesibjjf1stedition.pdf While doing MMA, it was a variant of this: http://www.ufc.com/discover/sport/rules-and-regulations#14 Granted, I fought so long ago that not everything was unified like it is now. The system used now (per above) was still being sorted out while I was involved. Shootfighting before that was, again, similar to the above later in the later fights I did. Prior to that, it was in a tournament format and if I recall the scoring system was a combined set of points from grappling and stand up. It was unwieldy, hence why it was probably moved away from, and so long ago I don't remember the specifics. Before that, I did (a very few) karate tournaments. If I recall (again, a long time ago) it was a point per contact regardless of punch or kick to any target area, head included. But it was so long ago and I've been so far removed from that aspect for so long, I don't remember specifics beyond that. Very interesting to see what everyone's responses will be. Great topic.

The scoring for IBJJF can be a handful. For grappling in general there is very little break in the action. Only actions deemed dangerous that rise to penalty will be stopped usually. There are 2 points for takedown (pulling guard is not a takedown, but he doesn't score for it either), 3 for passing the guard, 2 for side control, 4 for mount and back mount. Advantages are awarded for things that are "almost" something sweep or submission. Of course, submission beats all. Sounds easy, right? Now once you add in the scrambles of jiu jitsu it becomes less clear. Half guard isn't counted as a pass, except sometimes. Sometimes is and advantage when you catch it, unless it isn't. I went to a ref's course at the tournament and while I understand the rules way better than before, there is still some room for getting it fiddled up. He does score twice, for side and passing. Technically, the rules award progression of the game toward submission. However, sometimes it works better to lock up a position and work for advantages. It's part of the game. It does take some time to sort out. The advantages especially can be very ref dependent on what "almost" is, despite being relatively (at least on sweeps) well defined in the rules.

I just got back from what I called (and by that I mean stole the term from a friend ) my BJJ-cation. I finally took a trip out to California and competed in the IBJJF Pan Ams. I'd done several regional IBJJF events with an overall really good set of results and a few different ranks. I'd also done even more other grappling tournies from white belt on. I decided it was time to try out one of the majors. I have to say, it was a great experience. I lost in the prelims to a 4-stripe brown (I just got promoted in Nov. of last year) who had a long record of doing well at huge events like this. No loss of face there. I did feel like I had a decent match despite the loss. I really went out and wrestled to win and not to not lose. Here's the footage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZVBGYaFaCM Despite the outcome, I really think everyone who seriously does BJJ should make the trek at least once in their career. Standing on that big of stage is awesome and the the people you meet are just amazing in the field. The atmosphere alone on the big days is just incredible. Now it's back to training up.

Welcome to KF!

Weights and cardio!

Welcome aboard KF!

Welcome to KF! Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.