TJ-Jitsu

Not many really do big camps or anything of that sort. IMO if you dont train BJJ I dont think you'll find this very helpful and it would largely be a waste of money. For $500 you could easily buy yourself an entire season of training with enough left over for a private lesson. I'm not saying it cant be good or something of that sort, but it depends on why you're doing it. If its to celebrate, have at it. If you're trying to learn something, Id strongly recommend just going to a school.

Well yes the Gracies did train smart but they trained hard too. I do know that wrestling was done as far back as the Greek empire and probably earlier. The Greeks had wrestling, boxing, and Pankration which was their own form of MMA. I don't see the invention and development of firearms as something that would cause the grappling arts to be any more neglected than the striking arts. Neither grappling or striking arts are that good against firearms so if anything, it stands to reason that if one would be neglected due to firearms being used, both would be neglected. So the ability to wrestle was of greater use for hand to hand fighting than was striking for good reason- if you were able to strike you were able to use your spear, short sword, or dagger even. During the medieval era and even well into the renaissance with fencing and swordplay wrestling was heavily emphasized- to the point where it was speculated the person who would win a fencing duel is the one who's a better wrestler. You also have to consider that for most of warefares history, soldiers are also wearing armor so striking is going to be less effective and desireable. It just didnt make sense- if you can strike that means your opponent isnt grabbing you so theres nothign preventing you from drawing your secondary weapon (assuming you lost your first). Also of note is the way you got paid during the medieval era was through ransoms and pillage. Its not good business to kill your enemies when you can capture them and ransom them. As a result, wrestling them to the ground and subduing them was of greater importance.

Good topic, I can relate. Possibly my first mistake during my years of teaching is that students primary goal is to learn the best technique available. For example, I'd have a collection of techinques to show. Im confident no one can teach you a better way to do it, or has done it frankly. I can demonstrate it, articulate it, and use logic to support it on top of actually doing it. Many dont care. Even the guys competing at the world level. Its wierd in that you sometimes have to let people figure things out on their own and let them make their own mistake. Many of these guys wanted a few techniques, but most especially wanted to train and they wanted to train hard. As such I've cut back significantly on many details just to keep things short and sweet and get them moving. A second is that people are doing martial arts for the fighting aspect of it. This is also not true. Most people do whatever martial art because its a fun hobby that they enjoy-period. An example of making this mistake is saying "hey, lets bring in BJJ to this muay thai school- these guys would LOVE to learn how to fight on the ground, right?" Doesn't work like that. Very little interest in doing either. Frankly if people wanted to learn another style that complimented what they did, they'd be doing it already or would have approached you about bringing it in to the gym. So you have to take time to read people. Suppose you teach a seminar or whatnot and your focus is on giving the greatest details for one or two basic positions, you'll win few favorites and alienate many people. If you show a bunch of flashy stuff, the same thing will happen- merely in the reverse. You need to balance not just everyones needs, but everyones WANTS as well. Less you forget, this is a business. It doesn't matter what they need if they're not willing to pay you for it...

Meh.... not really. Martial artists around the world trained hard, some harder than the gracies. The gracies trained smart, analyzing and exploiting an incredible weakness in the martial arts world as it pertains to ground fighting. Grappling was always a dominant style of fighting, going back to renassaince, medieval, and even roman-greek world. It was neglected as a martial art when firearms were steadily introduced.

Heres an 80 yr old demo'ing judo For the sake of simplicity, Judo and BJJ are the same thing with emphasis on two different phases of fighting. Theres more to it than that, but as I said keeping it simple... Needless to say anyone of any age can do judo at any age

I’ve listened to some of it, but I’ll be completely honest here (surprising, I know.... ). I don’t think it’s the best strategy for fighting from guard. I think it’s great for catch wrestling but counter to Jiu Jitsu. Perhaps... but what I have found is that it works. If I put my opponent in, for example, bottom side control, but they are defending the submission and just kind of stalling me there, if I make them hold my weight and then work slowly towards a better position, my opponent is more likely to give me something trying to get out than if I just sit there. Oh I'm far from denying that it works- its a great idea and a great strategy, I just wouldn't trade for mine tbh....

Where did you answer my question? You wrote what is not required, I asked what is. What is the common denominator between elite level grapplers. Is is it visuospatial intelligence? Strong grips? I can barely find out of a building I just entered, so if it's spatial intelligence, It's not for me. Requirements? Be human- seriously. So what makes an elite level grappler? This is a relative statement. Some people have a little bit of technical knowledge, but a great amount of athleticism. These are your guys that are incredibly athletic and with a little knowledge can go a far way. Then you've got guys that are really technical and have an amazing understanding of the game and what they're trying to accomplish. These are your technicians. The less you have of one the more you'll need of the other. Intelligence strong grips In my experience high level grapplers tend to be very familiar with what they use (often arent we all?) but limited in their knowledge of what they dont know. Ive seen BJJ world champions that hip escape like a blue belt. IMO

I think the premise is flawed. EBI and FTW are not "most". The IBJJF and it's clones are the dominate force in competitions to date. The pass is still awarded 3 points and I have yet to roll with anyone of rank who is not a monster when in comes to the guard pass or who has bad pressure. Of course there are better and worse but that's wildly different than a lack of. That’s a fair statement. Did I mention I tend to think in extremes? My statement still stands in regards to black belts below middleweight. You’re A bigger guy, I’d really hope any black belt middle or above has good pressure, but many light guys simply give way too much space. There are a few exceptions but they’re exactly that. My justification? Watching no gi comps and most especially mma where. Passing as a whole tends to be most successful with gi and least for mma with no gi being middle ground.. I was actually including little guys in this as well. Buy the time you get awarded a brown or black belt you should feel heavy regardless based on weight distribution alone. I don't know any who don't. Maybe I'm being too harsh of a critic...

I try to get my guys to undermine my techniques all the time. I encourage them to doubt and question everything and anything I do. I only ask that they be vocal and voice their opinion to ME rather than someone else when I’m not there. Frankly, I love having people like you in my class. I find they stick with me the most and obviously really understand the method to my madness. If you like getting answers to the questions you ask, you’d love being in my class. That said, my personal opinion is that one should always be skeptical. I’m teaching you a science, not a religious dogma. I’ve found those that get most upset when people have questions are the ones that don’t have the answers....

Distance control is the answer for each and every guard. Either opening or closing, which will lead to you a set of tactics for each. The application of which one will depend on you, him, the situation, and environment. My favorite is the one that the door is open to. I'm partial to butterfly and spider for the simple reason that those are the ones I like, so I drill them more, hence I am more reliable with them across a wider array of situations. Superior depends on situation and the training of each fighter. I do think everyone needs a solid closed guard game. It's the one you'll want when all else falls apart. Sweep or submit? What the situation, what's your partner doing, what are your goals in the encounter, and what have you trained the most. No right or wrong. I like it. I agree with the idea of "no right or wrong." My jiu jitsu improved drastically when I stopped saying right or wrong... but did start saying "more or less efficient."

So kicking combos tend to be rare in Muay Thai by comparison but I’ll explain why. Throwing a kick potentially puts you in a bad position because you’re on one leg. As such you want to make sure your kick is “worth it.” In this sense it means power. If you throw kicks without power (and by power I mean the intent of breaking someone in half) you’re opponent won’t respect them and will look to walk through them and drop powerful combos on you when you do. If you mixed up your weaker kicks with powerful ones the require your opponent respect them

I think the premise is flawed. EBI and FTW are not "most". The IBJJF and it's clones are the dominate force in competitions to date. The pass is still awarded 3 points and I have yet to roll with anyone of rank who is not a monster when in comes to the guard pass or who has bad pressure. Of course there are better and worse but that's wildly different than a lack of. That’s a fair statement. Did I mention I tend to think in extremes? My statement still stands in regards to black belts below middleweight. You’re A bigger guy, I’d really hope any black belt middle or above has good pressure, but many light guys simply give way too much space. There are a few exceptions but they’re exactly that. My justification? Watching no gi comps and most especially mma where. Passing as a whole tends to be most successful with gi and least for mma with no gi being middle ground..

I’ve listened to some of it, but I’ll be completely honest here (surprising, I know.... ). I don’t think it’s the best strategy for fighting from guard. I think it’s great for catch wrestling but counter to Jiu Jitsu.

Jiu jitsu is also a big art. most of us don't have time to explore all of it. Let me be honest. As a black belt and a school owner. There's lots of advanced tactics I don't know, don't do, and don't teach. No, I'm not working on the bermbolo, worm guard, or whatever the new super move is. It's just not my game. Now, I can show you some pretty cool set ups and "advanced" application of side control and spider guard. Because that is my thing. But what drives these? Weight distribution, connection manipulation, fundamental technique and tactics strung together in ways that allows me to chain action that is "advanced" in nature. I'm not saying those other things are bad, just that they aren't my thing and I don't have time to make them my thing. If we're honest, this is probably true of most of us. If you're winning high level comps like the worlds and pans you're already training more than probably 80 percent of the jiu jitsu population. You have should have some stuff the rest of us don't do regularly in you tool box. It's math. The solid grasp of the basics also ensures that you have something to go back to when all else fails. I like spider guard. I got punched in the face hard doing it once and I'm all loopy. Guess what, because of the basics I had the option to pull to closed guard and sweep. Even with my head ringing, because someone made me revisit the fundamental constantly. They will always be there with situation ally some of the specific things we do might not because of one reason or another. It's just a matter of determining how much training time you have and comparing that to your goals then making sure the two match. I’ll be honest, lots of top notch guys I’ve competed against or trained with didn’t have technical details- some were merely more athletic than their counterparts. Of course, relative to your joe hobbyist they’re incredibly knowledgeable, but many of them do thing the same way you do- they’re just bigger, faster, or stronger when they do it... But I also want to address how you brought up basics and closed guard. This is getting to the heart of what I’m bringing up. Tempest for example brought up a “gift wrap.” I’ve heard of it and know what it is, but I wouldn’t consider it a “basic.” I also wouldn’t consider “closed guard” on that list because it’s a position and not a technique.... therefore it can’t be a basic technique eh? It would seem everyone has a different definition of what constitutes a “basic” technique and what “basics” are. This makes the entire discussion relative. What’s basic to you is advanced to a blue belt. This is also why I hate the argument that “basics make up advanced positions.” While I agree with that statement, I think it needlessly complicated the discussion when we don’t even have a concrete non bias definition and explanation as to what these basics are. Everyone has a different answer, and they all seem to be relative. I should also point out these answers are consistent all the way up the food chain too... I hope this doesn’t come across as an attack on you because it’s not. I just very much prefer a Socratic Method of teaching/learning. As such I welcome it when it comes my way too...

You must know everything and be perfect. You are Not expected to tap- ever- for any reason. This includes when the instructor is demonstrating on you.

You're going to need to be VERY careful, to state the obvious... To state the less obvious, live in half guard. Nothing else exists as far as you're concerned. This will save your back as you wont be getting stacked. Be sure to convey your ailment to your coach wherever you train. You might have to limit your training partners to higher belts until you (and they) figure out how you're going to move on a regular basis.

I agree with your notion that many tend to do basics not so well long after they're no longer white belts, and this includes black belts as well... sometimes really good black belts ironically enough.... Far as Rener, I think hes going against a blue belt in that video. Its hard to tell (his belt looks blue). If he is a black belt hes an older one and a hobbyist. I'm not going to judge Rener when hes just playing around.

Yes. Often seen from two different perspectives. One is a skilled fighter who, lacking takedowns, pulls an opponent on top of them in order to initiate a ground game, albeit from their back. The second is what I had initially mentioned- people with limited ground experience (often striking or something else) who learn grappling so as to avoid it. Pulling guard seems to kill the idea of avoiding the ground, but often done because they see high level guys do it, so they assume that it must be a good idea or the guard is a good place from which to fight. Ah, I gotcha now. As one of those stand-up guys that has limited experience in ground fighting (although not from lack of trying), I would much rather be in the mount than try to pull a guard. If I'm going to take someone down, I'd rather end up in the dominant position than in the guard.You would think, right? That's the reason for the question- wondering if anyone belongs to any school that teaches that and what the reason for it might be. Some of the very basic (hehe, there's that word again) grappling that I've taught in the course of law enforcement defensive tactics has been covering techniques from the guard, but I don't teach to pull guard. They are basically taught from the perspective of "if you end up here." I don't tell my guys to try to get there. Indeed. On the definition of “basic” I think most people identify it as “simple.” I don’t think most know how to make their basics effective or efficient however- as in there can be a clear deviation between “simple” and “effective” for many Jiu Jitsu practitioners

No. Just no. See, when you post things like this you help justify abusive content, specifically directed AT you. Excuse you, I've just promoted myself to 10 degree black belt, where are your manners!?

Yes. Often seen from two different perspectives. One is a skilled fighter who, lacking takedowns, pulls an opponent on top of them in order to initiate a ground game, albeit from their back. The second is what I had initially mentioned- people with limited ground experience (often striking or something else) who learn grappling so as to avoid it. Pulling guard seems to kill the idea of avoiding the ground, but often done because they see high level guys do it, so they assume that it must be a good idea or the guard is a good place from which to fight. Ah, I gotcha now. As one of those stand-up guys that has limited experience in ground fighting (although not from lack of trying), I would much rather be in the mount than try to pull a guard. If I'm going to take someone down, I'd rather end up in the dominant position than in the guard.You would think, right? That's the reason for the question- wondering if anyone belongs to any school that teaches that and what the reason for it might be.

Now we’re starting on the same page... So, TJ, since you started this up, I'm assuming you have an answer to your own question. As an instructor/trainer, what do you consider to be the basics of BJJ? Say its my first class, what should I expect to learn? And what do I expect to learn that first month to 6 weeks, as per the basics? The basic moves would be your bridge and your hip escape. You could argue stand in base but that's not really a move as much as its the same as the previously mentioned techniques done from a different angle. What I'd most likely expose you to is these two moves and that's usually taught from mount. Beyond that you'd also most likely learn the scissor sweep and how to posture from inside the guard. My focus though was WHY these are the basics and how I can justify them. Firstly let me say knowing them isnt a "yes" or "no" thing as much as its a spectrum. For example, to ask someone "do you know jiu jitsu/bump and roll/hip escape?" isnt the most appropriate question as much as "HOW WELL do you know jiu jitsu/bump and roll/hip escape?" That in itself opens up a whole different can of worms as to what an "absolutely" correct way of doing a bridge and hip escape is....

Yes. Often seen from two different perspectives. One is a skilled fighter who, lacking takedowns, pulls an opponent on top of them in order to initiate a ground game, albeit from their back. The second is what I had initially mentioned- people with limited ground experience (often striking or something else) who learn grappling so as to avoid it. Pulling guard seems to kill the idea of avoiding the ground, but often done because they see high level guys do it, so they assume that it must be a good idea or the guard is a good place from which to fight.

Or you could just be this guy..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXgEz6vDRFM

I'm still confused. An intermediate level boxer is still not going to "floor" you. I mean its one thing to get popped, but I'd consider amatuers to be "intermediate" level. I don't get whats so difficult about wanting to step in and goa few rounds. Its sparring not fighting...

That's always been the mentality of karate and the eastern style arts though- one punch one kill, hence the point sparring. Continuous sparring is better because its more realistic. The fact that people end up with wild swinging haymakers and untechnical punches is their fault- not the sparring format... Ultimately you want to graduate to just "sparring" like a simple boxing/thai boxing setup where its continuous and the power is a little greater.