Tempest

This is very long, but very relevant to this discussion.

Two things that are important on this. 1. This was an announcement by the Gracie organization that is the governing body for BJJ in the state of Rio de Janeiro Brazil. You can't swing a cat without hitting 6 black belts there. It seems a reasonable requirement for them given the circumstances. 2. The announcement was that you must have a black belt present to govern a school. That doesn't mean you can't have lower belts teaching, just that they must be supervised by a black belt. Don't know that I agree with this all the way, but it is a similar requirement to what we have in Judo, so... whatever.

Absolutely. But part of that comes from the disjointed nature of the art, and which fundamental mechanics each instructor wants to emphasize. But, if you want to come up with a good list, take a look at those movements that are a commonality across a large majority of schools, and those mechanics that seem to come up over and over again in different techniques. For example, one of the basics for me and my students is the "trap and roll' or "Bridge and roll escape" as it's sometimes called. Because that movement comes up over and over again in a variety of techniques, and it exploits a useful fundamental mechanic that is common to the situations we may find ourselves in. Another one is the "technical standup" for the same reasons.

Since you wanted to start a fig ... err discussion, I'll play. The basics are important because the really good advanced stuff is just basics done well or done under different positions or done in combination. For example, let's look at the basic berimbolo back take from top half-guard, by many considered to be an advanced move. But what is it really? All you are doing is combining a gift wrap back take with a forward roll. Both white-blue belt moves, but when done smoothly in combination, you get something that is worthy of purple-brown belt at least. You will find this idea repeats it'self all throughout Judo and Jiu-jitsu. And yes, I DO attend both the beginners AND advanced classes as time allows, because a lot of being good is about being better than you were yesterday at WHATEVER you are doing. To really reach the MOST advanced level, you have to find the smooth combination of basics in to something advanced that works for you, BUT in order to that, your basics have to BE smooth, and effortless enough to do in combination.

Probably because they went to a BJJ or Judo school once and got WRECKED by someone pulling guard because they didn't know anything, and they also didn't realize that there opponent was letting them have the top position to work because they obviously didn't know anything. Then they probably went to some seminars with someone like Keenan to correct the "I don't know anything" or watched some videos, and learned a guard pull as their "Technique". They figure that they get wrecked with it, so it must be a good move right?

I will see your shameless plug and raise you a book recommendation. 'Meditations on violence' by Rory Miller. Very good book on this subject as a whole. It's where I first learned about IMOP. Although I think I own a BUNCH of Kane and Wilder's stuff as well.

Perhaps so. Though that's an awful lot of terrible behavior you're proposing to engage in considering the sheer number of folks that harm each other on a regular basis. But leaving that aside, who are we to say that they didn't have cause? All of the fighting I have done in my life, and I can tell you my opponents thought they had cause plenty of times. I didn't agree, and perhaps society wouldn't either, but that is irrelevant to them at that moment. What is relevant is what sort of behavior YOU are willing to engage in on a regular basis. Or me for that matter. I know myself well enough to know that while I could live with harming another person if it happened, I would have to be provoked far beyond what is necessary to get me to engage physically with someone, in order to be willing to gouge an eye or certain other tactics. I need a scalable response, and most of those things are not. Keeping it playful, or sporting as the english would say, enables me to choose the level response based on the level of threat. As the old saying goes, if your only tool is a hammer... I agree with you. The level of aggression is equal to the level of response. "The level of aggression is equal to the level of response" sounds good on paper but not possible in reality.If a person throws a stone at me, then should I throw a stone back? If someone throws a stone at me, then that person has chosen to do harm to me, my response is to stop that person's intent from continuing, being open to use whatever force to make it possible, being a gentleman or not will have nothing to do with the methods I choose to use, that could include not to be violent or aggressive. So this is where an in-depth understanding of levels of force is very useful. Level of force is related to a combination of intent and likely outcome, not necessarily choice of weapons. For example, the standard used by most legal systems in developed western countries is I.M.O.P. Standing for Intent, Means, Opportunity, and Preclusion To take your example of someone throwing stones: Are they throwing stones to hit and harm you? or is it just some kids messing around. Those require 2 VERY different responses. Also Means, Are these actual stones that CAN harm you? Or are they just tennis balls that leave a bruise at the most. Different responses. Opportunity. Are you within range of these stones? And, Can you get OUT of range easily and safely? Different responses. Finally Preclusion. Are they throwing stones at you because you are somewhere you are not supposed to be? Are you breaking in to their house? Are you standing on the clearly marked stone throwing range? Different responses. Even the simplest example, when you add the complexity of the real world to it, becomes undeniably complex and requires more than a simple attack/response drill.

Congratulations to all of the nominees and winners. Thank you all for your contributions to this community.

I am fairly sure I would have tied with you for that one...

Well sure you do. It is a much more failure resistant strategy. There is something else to consider. Long term energy drain. If you try to pass my guard, and I am good at guard retention, you are at best, even on the energy expenditure line. With no long term effects, assuming you are not successful. If you just punch me, then even if it doesn't really accomplish much in terms of a knockout, you have scored, you have done SOME damage, even if very little, and you are likely ahead of me on the energy expenditure curve. You have also forced me to defend strikes from the bottom, a prospect that makes attacking from the bottom a LOT more difficult. Additionally, it takes more posture control to pass than it does to punch. So if your opponent is attacking your posture, punching them is more feasible than passing. I recognize that you are identifying extremes, but I am pointing out that professionals have a particular strategy for a reason, and guard passing has fallen out of favor not for lack of knowledge, but in favor of other, less risk prone, strategies.

Perhaps so. Though that's an awful lot of terrible behavior you're proposing to engage in considering the sheer number of folks that harm each other on a regular basis. But leaving that aside, who are we to say that they didn't have cause? All of the fighting I have done in my life, and I can tell you my opponents thought they had cause plenty of times. I didn't agree, and perhaps society wouldn't either, but that is irrelevant to them at that moment. What is relevant is what sort of behavior YOU are willing to engage in on a regular basis. Or me for that matter. I know myself well enough to know that while I could live with harming another person if it happened, I would have to be provoked far beyond what is necessary to get me to engage physically with someone, in order to be willing to gouge an eye or certain other tactics. I need a scalable response, and most of those things are not. Keeping it playful, or sporting as the english would say, enables me to choose the level response based on the level of threat. As the old saying goes, if your only tool is a hammer...

Let's try and look at this from another point of view shall we? Last night I was watching the most recent Werdum vs Overeem fight. Now, at one point, I believe in the 3rd, with lots of time left, Werdum gets him down, and winds up in his guard. Werdum undoubtedly knows guard passing, undoubtedly is significantly BETTER at Jiu-jitsu than his opponent, and was actively trying to work. BUT, he was unable to pass the guard. Why? I posit not because he doesn't know guard passes, but because guard passing is inherently more difficult to do if your opponent knows Jiu-jitsu as well. You mentioned it's like a boxer choosing to trade with someone, but I posit that it's not like that because there are 2 major differences to consider. 1. Overall, striking skill is still more inconsistent in MMA than Jiu-jitsu. Like I said before, they ALL do Jiu-jitsu, not all of them are Boxers. 2. It is possible to trade punches with someone in a fairly defensive manner. It is also possible to convince yourself, either because it's true or because you are good at convincing yourself, that you can take a punch. Not so much with an arm-bar. These differences make this a less analogous discussion. Now, I agree that people need to be familiar with positional hierarchy, but a good definition of high-level jiu-jitsu is being able to achieve the same results with fewer steps to get there. For example, the first place I was taught to hit an armbar from was a controlled full mount, but you later learn to catch it from guard, from inside half guard, and several other positions, all basically the same armbar, just done with fewer steps to set it up.

Consider that passing guard is a dangerous and difficult, and as you point out, ultimately unnecessary, thing to do in a fight against someone trained in Jiu-jitsu. Consider that, first of all, if my takedown game is solid I can often bypass the guard altogether. If I can't, then it is safer and more productive to just score points from the top and make the other guy scramble. Guard passing is risky. You risk the sweep, the sub, the upkick, or just your opponent getting back to his feet. For what? Usually a temporary improvement in position unless you are WAY better at Jiu-jitsu than the other guy, or catch him just right. Even if I CAN pass someone guard, guys like GSP and Lister, and others, have shown that their are other options with a different risk/reward profile. Now in competitive Jiu-jitsu, Leg-locks have proven that they can be an effective alternative to guard passing, but as you point out, and others have as well, they are rather like Sutemi-waza in Judo, beautiful if it works, but somewhat self destructive if it fails. Perhaps ultimately the counter to the "Dive on the leg" strategy is some basic defenses and a return to very old school positional strategy jiu-jitsu.

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.

Although I understand and sadly know where you are coming from due to those that do not understand how and when to use certain techniques I do not agree that, what most now days call self defense techniques, do not work. It depends on your knowledge of the techniques, how to apply them, when to apply them and against what technique to apply them. I have used what some would call dirty fighting techniques in real situations and I can promise you that they work. Back in my youthful rowdy Marine Corps days they have gotten me out of sticky situations in bar fights. And to your point there are things that work to get loose from a choke. What you're speaking about is really a point of what the attackers pain tolerance is and how mentally intent he is on executing the technique. In this case a simple bite or eye gouge may not work but this is only listing the most basic dirty fighting tactics. Not arguing with your point because I understand that their are less than qualified people teaching less than effective techniques but this does not encompass every teacher, art or technique. Just my 2 cents. I really need to try and train with you at some point Matsu. Because my experience has been similar to TJ's on this. I don't think anyone is saying that such techniques don't/can't work, what we are saying is that: 1. Such techniques are not the world beating force multipliers that they are often made out to be by people who have never fought with contact before. 2. If you are in a bad position, particularly in grappling range, such techniques will not work as a substitute for a structural escape against anyone with even a modicum of training. It's not that, for example, if I am grabbed from behind, a groin strike absolutely WON't work, because of course it might, it's that my time to react is limited, and I would rather do something structural, that I have practiced thousands of times against real resistance, that I KNOW will work. Most people vastly underestimate the effects of adrenal stress response on male combative ability, and they don't realize that someones response to a painful stimulus may not be to let go, it may be to squeeze harder.

I don't think they were. I know you address this later in your post, but I believe my professors experience clearly shows that while some people ARE doing sub-only without regards to position, this is a self correcting problem as he almost got his arm broken over it. As to some of your other points... I have not met a "pure" BJJ guy that could do a takedown to save his life. We all crosstrain that aspect of our game. As for guard passing, guys like Keenan Cornelius and the Miyao brothers have shown that to be a losing strategy, at least in BJJ competition. Pull guard and sweep or submit. That is the strategy. One good counter to that strategy is leg-locks. While they do cause you to give give up position, so does a failed guard pass if the person on bottom has any sweep game at all. And the payoff is much larger with the ability to get the tap right away. With guys like Dean Lister out there promoting these techniques, you aren't going to win with the idea that this is somehow a "less effective" strategy for the game that the people doing it are playing. Now, if you think it would not translate well to MMA, or a self defense situation, where all kinds of striking on the ground was allowed... you're right. BUT, I would make the argument that even someone as old school and great as Marcelo Garcia has a rather terrible MMA record. Translating from grappling to fighting requires training specifically for that context. Now, in the early days of BJJ, they did that, all the time, but the sport has grown, changed, and evolved since then. If you want to have a sport, it's got to have rules. If you have rules they will be gamed by people seeking to win within the rules. The only REAL way to avoid this is what we do in HEMA. Constant rules confusion. No standard rules, each tournament can run it how they want, and players just have to read the rules as they are published for that event. BUT, I will tell you that makes running high level competitions a LOT harder.

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, 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. Now as to whether or not the strategies are helping. I am not sure, but I can tell you what happened to my professor. He has trained a lot of sub-only, went to the IBJJF no-gi worlds and lost. He went for a leg-lock, gave up position, and his opponent was able to use his position to set-up and finish an armbar. We have had this discussion before though. I still think what you are really complaining about is the addition of leg-locks as a strategy. If the positional rules/hierarchy respected leg-lock positions more, then I would be willing to say that sub only is just for people who can't really compete. But, as long as the "rules" don't account for things like someone caught in 411... I thing that the sub-only guys may have a point.

What do you consider a proficient level? Training at least 3 days a week at most Jiu-jitsu/Judo schools you will be quite competent to defend yourself against anyone that doesn't know Jiu-jitsu/Judo in about 6 months to a year depending on your athleticism and the intensity with which you train. But for how long? This training is like firearms or running or any other physical skill. That is to say: It degrades quickly without use. If you train for 6-months to a year and then stop, the real question is: How long will you retain enough to still be effective? And that, I cannot answer. It REALLY depends on the student. Their mindset. How much they absorb. How physically fit and adept they are. All of the above.

Congrats!

Yeah... what he said

See Matsu, this is why I would love to train Karate with you. If I were in Kentucky I would probably try and do that. The ability to admit when you don't know everything. Most of my regular training partners in Judo and Jiujitsu will be the first to direct you somewhere else if you come looking for striking training, even though several of them ARE black belts in Karate/Tae-kwon-do and one of them is a former pro kickboxer. I don't even list Karate among my styles HERE though I have been doing it off and on for 20+ years. The thing is, it's still not my area of expertise. Yet, when I speak to people, in my area anyway, who have maybe 6 months to a year part time training in a grappling discipline they will be happy to tell me all about how they are great at it. Marketing. It's all just marketing. And don't think that the Jiu-jitsu schools are immune to this either. Commercial martial arts schools are simply vulnerable to marketing based ego drives or ego-based marketing drives.

Since this was obviously a setup... if you want to call what they were doing fighting... ok. Well, she clearly has no idea how to hit with anything resembling power and he has no idea how to do... anything, but size and strength count for a lot and count for more when nobody has any skill, so... I call it a tie.

Tip #1: Wrap your hands. You can train longer on a bag, get more reps, and do more with it if you do this. Tip #2: Bags give a lot more than a human head. Think about that the next time you are thinking about punching someone in the head. Tip #3: Start slow. Work on structure, alignment, and focus before adding footwork, and then finally speed and power. Tip #4: Consistency beats intensity every time. Tip #5: Try to add a small improvement to one thing each time. Don't try to work on everything all at once. These should get you started. Something else to think about though, the thing that the bag, especially a hanging bag, is for, is not to train power, but to train measure and movement. If you feel weak, or are too tense, you may want to adjust your distance to the bag to begin with.

If you took off the belts, and the gi's, and asked me to pick out the most skilled grapplers from a lineup of random people, one of the things I would look for is at least a bit of ear damage. Maybe not a huge amount, but if you do this long enough, and intensively enough, you are gonna get some. Hopefully you learn after a bit ways to reduce it, but especially in the beginning, it's like getting scars on your knuckles from the makiwara, it's just one of those things that happens.

Depends on your definition of tolerance. We get a lot of tough guys in Judo and Jiu-jitsu. Lot's of people with "High pain Tolerance". Not very helpful against chokes and armbars. Mostly folks have to have the wherewithal to endure failure again and again. Trying to "Tough it out" against a proper choke or joint lock is something we actually try to train OUT of people as it is monumentally stupid and will get you injured or crippled. It also impedes learning for everyone involved. The thing we are looking for is folks who, after tapping or being thrown, get back up and go at it again with a smile.