TJ-Jitsu

That was a faked video that's been around for a long time, often with different titles but wing chun isn't one of them. It was initially labeled as capeiora fights mma. It's a staged video- i don't even think the crowd isnreal Wow you have a good eye TJ-Jitsu but Superman punches are very real. Of course they are, but they're hardly a wing chun innovation. They've been around about as long as kicks have in the UFC. In fact, the more committment to the roundhouse, (or attempted roundhouse) the easier and stronger the superman punch. An early 1980s Wing Chun movie (Pre 1993 UFC) "The Prodigal Son" in it landing a Superman punch. If that's a superman punch, its terrible. It'd be more appropriate to call that a "jumping punch" than a superman punch, and most likely done for theatrics. This guy merely jumps and throws his fist- theres no power on that (we've talked about that, yeah?). A superman punch comes from the feigned kick snapping back into a punch. Still the power has to be derived from the foot that's on the ground as that's the one pulling the leg that did the kicking. To merely jump and throw a punch is to do just that, and is to lose any and all power...

You’ll have to forgive me for not watching that interview. It’s over 2 hours long. Is that John Dannahers suggestion and words? Fight for control?

Now we’re starting on the same page...

Yeah I saw something like that going around not too long ago. I cant completely comment on it because frankly I cared less than it... Ive heard a couple of people say certain things like "this only applied in Brazil" or "it only applied to Gracie gyms." Either way you look at it, a belt is nothing more than someone elses opinion. What that means is there are some purple belts that can beat, or haven beaten black belts. We could also argue there are some purple belts that are better teachers than black as well. I've seen it, I've trained with them, and its not terribly uncommon. That's the problem with jiu jitsu-there is no straight cohesive plan or definition as to what makes a black belt or not. Its all relative and even then its still someone elses opinion. Just as well is the suggestion that "only black belts can teach." My only response to that was "your opinion is noted...."

Different styles and different schools are going to have different basics. This is just human. Ultimately, I don't think it's important to have unification at the onset. With martial arts, it's the whole journey that matters, and in the end, you'll find some sense of unification, as it seems that's when the collection of principles merge. Not everything fits in a nice little box. It's a big world out there, and sometimes you'll have to expect some grey area. I see what both of you are saying here. However, I do tend to agree with what TJ is getting at. In TKD, I classify basic kicks as front kicks, side kicks, and round kicks. Everything else I can build off these three kicks. In my limited BJJ experience, I would tend to believe that there are some BJJ basics out there that most instructors would agree on. I'll go a step further and say it doesn't matter if the instructors agree on it or not, much the same way that scientists don't have to agree on a theory for it to be valid....

My bad, sorry about my post!! A different list...or is what JR posted, what you're asking for?? Yes I love the “yes” response to a multiple choice question. Me: “Honey, do you want to go to the Italian restaurant or the steak restaurant?” My wife: “Yes.” Me: Shakes head and walks away thinking “how is it someone with a degree in English has no clue how to speak English?” That happens about 4 times a day on average. Different questions, same answer. I admit, I do this often.. But "yes" in the sense of do all of the above. Get some more material in this thread.

My bad, sorry about my post!! A different list...or is what JR posted, what you're asking for?? Yes

Different styles and different schools are going to have different basics. This is just human. Ultimately, I don't think it's important to have unification at the onset. With martial arts, it's the whole journey that matters, and in the end, you'll find some sense of unification, as it seems that's when the collection of principles merge. Not everything fits in a nice little box. It's a big world out there, and sometimes you'll have to expect some grey area. Im going to be a little provocative here (imagine that....) I would add the following to the end of those sentences: "To my knowledge" and "So far" And the conversation can take a rather dynamic course eh? Then that's not a conversation. I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'd appreciate the same courtesy. I think you’re misinterpreting my intentions or my posts- I’m merely trying to stimulate a conversation not put words in your mouth. When I suggest those two phrases I’m suggesting that absolute knowledge is something that is rare, perhaps not attained yet- so maybe we start to brainstorm about what we think those basics could be, what makes them “the basics” and what legitimizes that claim. So let me rephrase. I always add those two phrases when I hear someone show, teach, or explain something. It still becomes a conversation, just not necessarily an opinion and it puts things into perspective. - what if I were to ask you to add those two phrases at the end of your statements? Would you have the same opinions then?

Different styles and different schools are going to have different basics. This is just human. Ultimately, I don't think it's important to have unification at the onset. With martial arts, it's the whole journey that matters, and in the end, you'll find some sense of unification, as it seems that's when the collection of principles merge. Not everything fits in a nice little box. It's a big world out there, and sometimes you'll have to expect some grey area. Im going to be a little provocative here (imagine that....) I would add the following to the end of those sentences: "To my knowledge" and "So far" And the conversation can take a rather dynamic course eh?

So what say you for your guard strategy? What are you trying to do from each guard, be it half, full or butterfly? Are you of the opinion that any one guard is superior to the other? If not why not? And if so why so? Finally the age old question: should you be fighting to sweep or submit? 😉

So what I find is that many people tend to repeat the phrase but perhaps with different wording. Even while saying it many have a difficult time demonstrating it or fully articulating it. I don’t say this solely in response to the comments on the thread, but to the numerous people I’ve asked this question of as well. Finally if if they are indeed “basics” then people shouldn’t have a different list. Leads me to the following conclusions: 1: Those explaining don’t fully and completely understand what they’re trying to justify (or they’re unable to articulate it- which is still the same thing) 2:No one has set out to identify what these “basics” are at the core level, hence all the disagreement and conflict 3:The basics simply aren’t important and it’s a false statement

How do we explain those that can do the fancy things but perform basic stuff poorly?

Anyone else? Maybe we should change this to the “TJ and Tempest forum” 😉

So what are "the basics" then? Surely someone has to have a list, right? No one ever gives you a list.... Everyones list seems to be different...

Such an oft touted phrase I hear all the time. I agree with it but I want to pick a fight and start an argu... err "discussion...." I hear lots of people say this phrase and often times it means "I don't know how to teach advanced stuff." It becomes a self serving statement "I teach the basics, the basics are important, therefore I teach important stuff." Why else might they say it? "My coach told me basics are important, so I'm just repeating him..." Can you articulate and explain the WHY behind this statement? Several people will claim this- maybe you're a blue belt or a purple belt. Do you attend the white belt classes then? Are you really practicing (and refining) your bump and roll, hip escape, and stand in base? Don't lie people, I know you're working on that hot new berimbolo sweep with a handstand into an inverted footlock you saw on youtube.... So here it is- if all the advanced guys are doing advanced stuff and you see them do a "basic" technique once every blue moon... doesn't it suggest the advanced stuff is where its at?

Why don't other fighters (like judoka) act like real men and pull guard more often in fights? ... ... ... Just kidding Of interest to me was browsing the internet (OMG!! I know I know...) and seeing other places teaching grappling that aren't grappling schools (or not very good at it if they are..) One of the things I see repeated often is "pulling guard." They actually teach their students how to pull guard. My next question is: when did people see this as a good thing? Why would someone want to pull guard, indeed especially if they're not a ground fighter? There are plenty people who are very experienced grapplers that still refuse to pull guard. I saw a Taijutsu school teaching it (or it was written on their blackboard...) and it was one of the things taught for Jeff Speakmans "Kempo 5.0"

See that's where I disagree. I would rephrase. Guard passing is not required to win. As such there is a tremendous lack of knowledge not just in how to pass the guard, but how to even open it as well. The lack of incentive only encourages "safer" strategies. In regards to energy consumption that's a valid point, but if you're good at moving your hips you're most likely going to carry that over to guard as well- hardly an efficient strategy. In fact I'd argue that muay be proving my point. If I can at least get to half guard I know I can hit without fear of being submitted, only swept or reversed. If I get to cross side no fear of either, only guard escapes. Even further when you get to mount where we can say the attempt to escape put the person on bottom in a very dangerous predicament. It's more the lack of knowledge on top than the skill on the bottom that's the primary reason for this. Again assuming both guys do everything right it still favors guy on top 100% Otherwise I agree on all else...

I would have preferred the title of "most provocative"

Of course. I'm not going to deny that passing is harder to do than strike from the guard. After all step one for both is posture up. To strike is easier at this point than to open and pass. All things considered though if the person on top really understands how to take space away and pass, there's no good reason not to. I've tried to watch some of Werdums fights. I can find the one point you spoke of in the overeem match though. I have seen him passing the guard though that tends to be the exception rather than the rule and I can explain this based off of what I've seen. First off I am ignoring certain things such as fatigue, pain, and "feel" of the opponent. These things can dramatically change the fight and ones strategy. Nonetheless... Werdum in a guard player through and through. Often times fighters with good guards tend to be less at passing and it makes sense- cause they're always on their back. He's clearly world class with his guard and world class with his back attacks, but he leaves some space when he tries to pass. This is again compared to other world class black belts. I noticed this watching some of his grappling matches and his fight against nogueira (which interestingly I didn't know they fought again!). Compared to a Demian Maia he's much more likely to hit compared to Maia's pass. Now if he stay on top he wins so it's hardly a bad strategy especially if his opponent can't sub or sweep him as I'm sure overeem won't. If he opens and passes though he gets such a good position that he could end the fight then and there, or risk losing it. He could have thought he was winning so he'd play it safe- only he can say. It would be interesting if it were say the last round (and he knew he was losing) how he would react? Would he still hit or try to pass? How does this happen? Well for starters he spends his time pulling guard so it'd be fair to say that's where he's most experienced. After guard is on the back. He knows how to really get close and take space away. Watch his matches and you'll notice something though. When he gets into any guard position he hesitates, albeit for a few seconds. Compare to Maia who never gives up the fight for his opponents hips. Werdum does it though and of all his positions that's where he goes the slowest and where he appears to be the "least" of his world championship Jiu jitsu. Now you'll say that it's because he's got to respect his opponents guard but that's a partial truth. There is space to fight for from any position guard no different. Now consider opponents can also attack from turtle as well in the sense of kneebars and leg locks but that doesn't keep him from attacking and subbing from there like a machine. He rarely gets side or full mount which is interesting considering his pedigree. Look at Maia and jacare for example. I only saw him in the guard of someone once in my video search and that was against nog. He stood up and backed up- that's not a "wrong" response but it's a hesitation to move forward and pass. Again there are several reasons for this that only he could answer such as strategy and fatigue, he was beating nog on the feet so why not stand, etc. I posit that if you’re really good at passing you’re going to want to do that to get to a position you can hit and your opponent can’t counter with a sweep or sub. It is surprising but not terribly uncommon. Let me see if we can't come to an understanding on this. We would assume that if someone is a black belt or if they're a world champion the must know every aspect of Jiu jitsu but that doesn't HAVE to be the rule. You've seen pre bjj guys do takedowns- it's horrible! Even guys that are 3rd, 4th degree for example, yet some can be phenomenal once they hit the ground. On a smaller scale one can be a world champ because his guard game is incredible and he gets his sweeps. Hypothetically after getting the lead with the sweep, he wouldn't need to know how to really smash and pass because he's already winning! The same Dan also be said for guys with great takedowns. Hypothetically they could be a black belt world champ with the guard of a blue belt because no one is able to either take them down or sweep them. We can also extend that rationale to escapes. Some guys are so good at keeping people from putting them in bad positions (i.e. Cross side or mount) that their escapes are very poor quality. All I'm merely trying to do is show that one doesn't have to be the best to be a world champ. I'm using this rationale to argue my point in general and not necessarily Werdums Jiu jitsu. I couldn't find much on him on video so I can hardly claim to dissect his game. I am using him as an example though- you can see him winning a tourney and never having to pass given the quality of his guard, yes? If both the top guy and the bottom guy do everything 100% correct, the top guy still wins 100 % of the time because of the leverage the position offers. Space is good for defense bad for offense so it's best to take it all away so your opponent can't use it. For mma striking on the ground is counter to grappling since you need to create space to do it. Again I'm not saying it's wrong I'm just identifying the extremes and I'm arguing this side of it.... Because I asked for an argument Once you get ahead of the game when you're on top the only reason you don't pass is because you hesitated or messed up. In other words, the pass is yours to mess up. This continues when you get to the side as well- done perfect you'll advance to mount rear mount or a sub. I understand people can't be perfect on top but neither can they on bottom so it's just as well. That's the mentality I have. Why waste time and energy punching from the guard when I can occupy this space and get more leverage? It takes no more time to pass than it does to punch, but the return is greater...(fair to say so too is the risk) 1 can be an argument. By definition bjj is with the gi so it'd be more appropriate to say they do grappling with a bjj coach. I'm fairly certain people in mma on average are much more comfy throwing hands than grappling 2 is debatable too I've seen plenty of guys who along with thinking they can't be koed also think they can't be subbed because bjj "doesn't work." But the final part of the meat I want to address. I kinda agree with you but there is more too it. First it's not a question of "do you know the arm bar?" That's improperly phrased from a bjj setting. More appropriate would be "how well do you know the arm bar?" The assumption most have is that after learning a move you must practice it over and over. That's half a truth. You should also be refining it as well. If you've done 10,000 arm bars and your last arm bar at black belt looks like rep 1000 when you were a blue belt, you haven't gotten any better technically. You've just became a black belt at being a blue belt.. Now when I speak refinement I'm suggesting efficiency, something never discussed thoroughly in the bjj world. That can be another discussion altogether and I'm on an iPad so you'll have to excuse me at the time being. So finally after we've completely refined our arm bar and gotten maximum efficiency the next thing is "when" to arm bar. This can take a long time, fortunately we've got our whole lives to do Jiu jitsu. So to recap, I agree that you're correct, although that doesn't imply I'm incorrect. What I do is identify the two extremes. On one hand is the concept of classic ground and pound- a wrestler who doesn't know what the guard is. Yes dear god don't try to pass because you don't know how too. At the other end though is a true understanding of bjj and its strategy where ground and pound would be considered inefficient and a waste of time. Why grind your opponent down from inside his guard for 3 rounds when you can pass and mount (or take the back) and finish in 3 minutes. Everything other strategy is merely a combo of those two extremes I just happen to see way more favor towards the ground and pound

As said earlier, I don't expect to see this of non BJJ'ers. In fact it would probably not be the best way to fight someone (at their own game...) I wouldn't say its "risky-" its risk only correlates with your knowledge or in this case I should say, ignorance. One risks the same when they sit in guard and merely try to hit just as well, granted the risks are a bit less. Nontheless, as one advances positional hierarchy into more dominant positions, one exercises much more control over their opponent. You're speaking from the POV of the guy that isn't the specialist though- if I were to say "its risky to trade punches on the feet" someone would probably state the obvious- "you're not a boxer, that's why." See what I mean? I absolutely understand the concept of "playing it safe" and "scoring points" but so many don't know how to get to a dominant position and if they do, don't know how to utilize it if they get there. A brief example of what I mean- listening to people suggest how there are more submission options from cross side than mount in no gi. Not so coincidentally, the people who say this tend to have lousy mounts- imagine that. This kinda ties in with what you said next and my reply I'm not familiar with Sutemi-waza or what it is- I will after I google it.... But in correlation with what I was saying before, a lot of jiu jitsu fighters aren't as adept at passing the guard and getting dominant position. To top it off, they are often lacking in knowledge of how to use said dominant positions effectively. When you start to change the focus of the game for leglocks, this knowledge base suffers. People don't pass anymore when they can attack the legs. Again not surprisingly the passing skills of the lighter jiu jitsu guys tends to be very poor. Pros to leg locks are often heavily in favor of the sport. Cons tend to be shown in the fight Pros of positional dominance are often shown in the fight Cons of positional dominance tend to be shown in the sport.

No. Just no. Look, a lot of high level fighters credit their wrestling background for helping them be successful in the fight game. But a lot of that has to do with the MENTAL toughness that you develop wrestling. Wrestling is an EXHAUSTING grind. And there is no real technical shortcut. You just have to grind it out till you are tougher than the other guy. You lose more than you win at first, and you just keep going. That means it is a great base for fighting. BUT, that being said. EVERY top 10 UFC fighter in EVERY division includes a BJJ coach in their camp or IS a BJJ black belt themselves. "Mediocre success" Man, what are you talking about? Now, maybe people aren't getting dominated on the ground the way they used to, because now we are seeing fights where EVERYBODY knows jiu-jitsu, but especially among the lower ranking fighters, Jiu-jitsu is a HUGE game changer. For example, the most recently aired season of the ultimate fighter included a woman named Roxanne Modaferri. A meh striker, with no wrestling background who wasn't really a top athlete, but she was a decent enough athlete, and her jiu-jitsu chops were undeniable, so she wound up in the final. And all through the first couple of rounds of the show, you saw whoever had the better jiu-jitsu pedigree almost universally won their fight. That said, when EVERYBODY has a good jiu-jitsu pedigree, it's what ELSE you bring to the table that distinguishes you, and wrestling is a great "something else" to come in with. I see your point, so I'll elaborate. Lets start with "choice of words." Instead of "mediocre success" we'll say "BJJ can be more successful!" The game has evolved and improved over the years. I think we can agree that everyone needs to know how to wrestle, box, and jiu jitsu themselves, yes? So in the sense that jiu jitsu is required for MMA, yes that's already been established with the old days of MMA as the evidence. The same is said for the other styles as well. Moving along... So now we've established a base- guys that are roughly purple belt level (or brown, or whatever) across the board. When I speak of poor jiu jitsu I'm gauging it against the average quality of fighter at that level and likewise when I'm speaking of jiu jitsu. Yes, these guys are elite fighters and grapplers, especially compared to regular blue belts and purple belts. So allow me to be specific: when I speak of jiu jitsu I'm speaking of their ability to get a dominant position after the takedown (i.e. passing the guard). When referring to the bottom its the ability to move and advance position (be it a sweep or submission) often in spite of your opponents ability to hold you. So again, choice of words- rather than say "their jiu jitsu sucks" I'll again elaborate. Yes they require jiu jitsu to posture up in the guard and defend, but there is so much more jiu jitsu they can use. While being good there is so much more they can use to be better that would allow them to dominate their opponents and make them better fighters as well. Now working from the bottom is a tough game to develop. The ability to defend yourself and minimize damage is already at a quality level. Even amongst jiu jitsu fighters good guard players are seldom the norm, so I'll say the bottom game is solid. The top however? No so much. Very few are capable of passing a guard. Now as a fighter, this isn't really that big of a deal because you don't have to pass the guard to attack. As it pertains to being a jiu jitsu fighter on the other hand? Its practically where you'll spend the majority of your time in jiu jitsu. To spend all that time there and but not utilize it when you fight? Consider: No one had to encourage Ray Mercer or James Toney (or any boxer) to box when they got in the ring. In fact its kinda implied. Likewise for any wrestler when it comes to wrestling- I'm quite certain they're going to shoot. But jiu jitsu fighters tend to have a much more difficult time pulling the trigger when it comes to passing the guard in MMA. What I'm saying is that people don't need to be encouraged to do things they're good at. The less you're attempting to pass, the less skilled you probably are at it and that's the one thing that is incredibly unique to BJJ . I'm not looking for someone to stand up, I'm not looking for someone to stay in guard and punch. Are they using jiu jitsu? Absolutely they are- but remember I'm calling this "the norm" from which the argument starts. Starting from here is where my discussion about BJJ begins. So the next question is, how well are they able to pass the guard and how good are they at being able to sweep or submit? These tend to be the exception rather than the rule amongst those who identify as BJJ fighters. To go on a tangent in regards to wrestling vs BJJ, yes I consider wrestling to be a better base for MMA, however I consider BJJ to be better for fighting. The difference? Weight classes. Comparing these two I think its easier for a wrestler to impose his game on a bjj fighter trained in wrestling than it is for a BJJ fighter to impose his game on a wrestler trained in BJJ. So to reiterate what I've said before- BJJ is still better now than it ever was before, but call me a perfectionist. Are they very knowledgeable fighters that are using some of every part of the game (including jiu jitsu?) Yes. Am I being a harsh critic? Sure- but remember Im looking for an argument I'm just as critical of myself too- for example when watching one of my matches as a brown belt I thought "hmm, the hips move well for a blue belt..."

So if I may offer a potential criticism, just because your instructor got armbarred doesn’t mean his opponent was good at it, as your coach could have been bad at defending it, bad from bottom, etc. Not attempting to insult but I do see people who make that fallacy at it pertains to Jiu Jitsu. It usually occurs when I listen to people talk about how important the “basics” are. I’m often quick to point out that just because you emphasize it, just because you talk about it- indeed just because you practice it a lot DOES NOT imply that you’re any good at it. So again I’m not saying your coach isn’t good (I don’t even know who he is) but I am postulating that there is the entire opposite spectrum you’re not taking into account: -is your coach knowledgeable at that skill set? -was his opponent? -was his opponent the exception of the norm as it pertains to that level? Oh yes- no argument there Actually that kind proves my point. Leverage favors the top position. The only reason being on bottom is desirable has to do with the ignorance of the people on top- their lack of knowledge of how to pass and take space away. The less knowledgeable one is about passing the more likely they are to stand up to pass. Virtually everyone stands up to pass and surprise Keenan’s work guard is configured around stopping the standing pass. The more you stand the more it works. Not surprisingly it works very often for him... Well I happen to agree with lister in the sense that for the rule set it IS the better strategy. Here’s a whole skill set you get to ignore (getting dominant position). This again becomes a severe problem when people aren’t forced to play your game by the ruleset (mma for example). I posit that Marcella lost his fights because he didn’t understand that difference between the sport and the fight. He obviously has the skill set, just applied it the wrong way. Ultimately I don’t fault bjj guys necessarily for being less successful in mma as much as I credit their opponents. People know to posture and defend inside guard. The old days people didn’t know this is didn’t know how to fight on the ground. The problem with the submission only rule set is this isn’t helping fighters to correctly adapt with the fighting game. And the gap is widening as a result. Bjjers aren’t learning how to impose their game on their opponents, save very few like Maia or jacare. All that being said, the new craze of leg locks has helped Bjj and it’s better now than it was 20 years ago, but it needs to shift its focus back to where it started and sharpen that aspect, less it continue its mediocre success in the fight game.

They're desperation techniques used (not surprisingly) by desperate people. Its not the technique your throwing so much as the position you're attempting to throw it from. Take a punch for example: Throw it from on top of someone it does damage. Throw it from the bottom and its laughably ineffective. The same goes for all these eye gouges and bites, throat rips, and what have you else. If you're not in a good position you don't have good leverage- therefore your attack is going to be quite weak. Most of the people teaching them haven't even done them. What this is an attempt to do is make a claim unfalsifiable. For example, let me get out of a choke by biting or eye gouging- I promise you it wont work- I've lost count of people trying to do that to me when I choke them- the biggest concern is losing control because I'm laughing so hard. So when you ask these people to prove what they're showing they back track and say "oh this is for real stuff, not sport." This leaves them the perfect scenario where they can make a grand claim ("defend yourself from X!) and never have to back it up- and people still believe them.... So in short I'd pull people I cared about out of that class, and my response when asked would be "You don't seem to be educated enough to teach this stuff...."

Fair enough. Since you asked. Let me start by turning the question another way. What do you think has happened to Judo since the ban on leg grabs? You would THINK it would have devastated the sport' date=' and lowered it's effectiveness, but, what has happened instead is that people adapt and become even better at a smaller subset of movements. Judo is now closer to greco than to freestyle. Sub only is fun for people because it feels more like free rolling. You are just out there rolling with the other guy and whoever catches one wins.[/quote'] I see your point in Judo, but the assumption is that the separate rules changes are equivalent and they are not. One the most identifying marks of BJJ is its practitioners (once) ability to achieve a dominant position. Sub only assumed these practitioners would continue to play the game the same but merely submit- they were mistaken. Your professors experience exemplifies what I mean. Yes I am complaining about the addition of leg locks as strategy because its a strategy that's less effective for what bjj was made for- fighting. So the reason the positional rules don't account for leg lock positions (i.e. scoring when you get to them) is because leg lock positions are NOT dominant positions. EVERY leg lock position gives up the top position and therefore moves backwards in the positional hierarchy. This is the double edged sword as it applies to them- they require no positional dominance and therefore can be thrown from anywhere. The con is you cant get positional dominance by attempting to attack the legs either. Why do I say this is detrimental? Position matters so much more in a fight than it does in a grappling tournament. Consider what the "opposite" of submission only (catch wrestling) is- folkstyle. Its the style that puts absolutely emphasis on position (being on top at all costs) and completely disallowing submissions. Sub only is the reverse- top position doesn't matter at all, so much so that people dive on a foot even when on top because if it fails you just jump on the other foot when you're on your back- hence the lack of quality takedowns from modern players (not that classic players had good takedowns either...). All of this is merely history repeating itself. What made BJJ what it was is its scoring system and emphasis not just on position dominance but positional hierarchy. Prior to going global, grappling was still very popular in Japan and the like with shooto. Same premise though with catch style rules- no one really passed the guard- as soon as fights hit the ground there was the attempt for the leg lock. The fact you couldn't hit with a closed fist only encouraged this. Then came along the Gracies, in particular Rickson. Heres a guy that can get positional dominance on top, and also pass and mount- and hes doing it with punches to the face after the fact. With so little training in guard retention or anything other than a leg lock, the best stars in japan were smashed quite quickly. The introduction of the leg lock game wasn't bad but it wasn't good either. I'm of the opinion people need to wait to throw legl locks until they get to brown and black- they need that time to learn how to pass a guard effectively. Its very very difficult to teach a leglock'er how to pass a guard because theyre so quick to jump on a leg when they run into difficulties. As I said, color me surprised that those with good leglocks are often severely lacking in pressure and passing skills in general.